The court affirms that when a petitioner withdraws a revision petition against an interim maintenance order, liberty to raise all available pleas before the Family Court may be granted. This decision upholds established procedural flexibility in family law matters and functions as binding authority for subordinate courts in the Punjab and Haryana jurisdiction.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CRR(F)/1049/2025 of HITESH TANWAR Vs PRIYANKA CHAUHAN AND ANR |
| CNR | PHHC011118782025 |
| Date of Registration | 21-07-2025 |
| Decision Date | 01-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISPOSED OF |
| Judgment Author | MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH |
| Court | High Court of Punjab and Haryana |
| Precedent Value | Binding on subordinate courts within Punjab & Haryana; persuasive elsewhere |
| Questions of Law | Whether a revision petition against an interim maintenance order can be withdrawn with liberty to raise all pleas at the trial stage in Family Court |
| Ratio Decidendi | The court allowed withdrawal of the criminal revision petition challenging an interim maintenance order, granting the petitioner explicit liberty to raise all pleas previously taken before the learned Family Court. Mediatory measures having failed, the court recognized the interim and non-final nature of the impugned order and preserved the rights of the petitioner to contest the issue afresh. No adjudication was made on merits at this stage. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Court-directed mediation failed; subsequently, petitioner’s counsel sought withdrawal of the revision petition challenging interim maintenance, requesting liberty to pursue all grounds before the Family Court. Petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty granted. |
| Bench | Single Judge Bench: Ms. Justice Kirti Singh |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts in Punjab and Haryana |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts and any court dealing with similar procedural withdrawal of petitions |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Explicit reaffirmation that revision petitions against interim maintenance orders may be withdrawn at any stage, with liberty to raise all previously advanced pleas before the trial (Family) court.
- Attempted mediation, though unsuccessful, does not affect the petitioner’s substantive rights when withdrawal with liberty is sought.
- No bar on re-agitating issues before the Family Court merely because a revision petition was filed and withdrawn.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court noted that mediation between parties was unsuccessful, as per the Mediation Centre’s report.
- Upon withdrawal request by the petitioner’s counsel, the court recognized that only an interim maintenance order was under challenge.
- The court permitted withdrawal of the revision petition, specifically granting liberty to raise all relevant pleas afresh before the Family Court.
- There was no examination or adjudication of the merits of the petitioner’s claims at this juncture.
- The approach preserves the rights of the petitioner without creating any adverse precedent on merits.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- Sought to withdraw the petition at this stage.
- Requested liberty to raise all pleas taken in the present petition at the appropriate stage before the Family Court, since only an interim maintenance order had been passed.
Respondent
- No specific submissions recorded regarding the withdrawal or liberty.
Factual Background
The petitioner challenged an order of interim maintenance in a family dispute. The court initially directed the parties to appear before the District Court mediation centre to seek an amicable resolution. The mediation attempt failed, as reported by the Mediation Centre. Subsequently, counsel for the petitioner sought to withdraw the revision petition, requesting liberty to raise all relevant pleas before the Family Court. The petition was dismissed as withdrawn with such liberty granted.
Statutory Analysis
The judgment refers to procedures under family law regarding interim maintenance orders and criminal revision petitions. It recognizes the ability of parties to withdraw a pending revision petition, especially against interim, non-final orders, and preserves procedural rights by allowing the same or similar pleas to be raised before the trial (Family) court.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
No dissenting or concurring opinion is recorded in the judgment.
Procedural Innovations
- The judgment allows for explicit liberty to re-raise pleas before the trial court upon withdrawal of a revision petition against an interim maintenance order, ensuring that withdrawal is without prejudice.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The judgment reaffirms existing procedural law allowing withdrawal of petitions with liberty to pursue pleas at the trial stage.
Citations
No specific citations or law report references are available in the judgment.