Shekh Ijhar Vs the State of Jharkhand

¶1

 ( 2025:JHHC:31647 )

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 540 of 2024

¶3

Sheikh Ijhar, aged about 35 years, son of Shekh Abdul Wahab, resident of village Narayanpur, P.O. Narayanpur, P.S. Seraikella, District-SeraikellaKharsawan ...... … Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

1.The State of Jharkhand

¶6

2.Mumtaz Khatoon, wife of Ijhar and daughter of Habib Ansari, at present resides at S. Road, Muslim Basti, P.O. and P.S. Adityapur, District-Seraikella Kharsawan .…. … Opposite Parties

¶7

-------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner :Mr. Ram Chandra Prasad Sah, Advocate For the State : Mr. Achinto Sen, A.P.P For the O.P. No.2 : Mrs. Vani Kumari, Advocate Mr. Akshay Kumar, Advocate

¶8

09/ 14.10.2025 : Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the O.P. No.2.

¶9

This revision petition has been preferred for setting aside judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 15.03.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Seraikella in Cr. Appeal No. 02/2022 and judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.03.2020 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella Kharsawan in Seraikella P.S. Case No. 80/2017, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 540/2017, T.R. No. 322 of 2020 whereby the petitioner was sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years with fine of Rs. 10,000/and in default of payment of fine, further sentenced to undergo two months of simple imprisonment and both the sentences will run concurrent and further it was ordered that the amount of fine deposited shall be given to the informant.

¶10

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the matter is arising out of matrimonial dispute and now good sense has prevailed between the parties and in view of that on 10.02.2025 a mutual agreement was executed between the petitioner and O.P. No.2. He further submits that as per one time settlement Rs. six lakh was decided to be given to the O.P. No.2 by the petitioner. He further submits that 1^st installment of Rs. two lakh has already

¶11

¶12

 ( 2025:JHHC:31647 )

¶13

been paid to the O.P. No.2 on 11.02.2025. He then submits that Rs. two lakh has been paid to the O.P. No.2 in terms of clause 9(kha) of the agreement contained in annexure-1. He also submits that Rs. four lakh has already been paid to the O.P. No.2. He then submits that Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has directed the petitioner to deposit remaining amount of Rs. two lakh before the learned Registrar General of this Court by order dated 25.07.2025 and pursuant to that order a demand draft of Rs. two lakh drawn in the name of O.P. No.2 has been deposited before the learned Registrar General. He submits that an O.P. No.2 may be allowed to withdraw the said demand draft from the office of the learned Registrar General. He then submits that other cases between the parties including the divorce case filed by the petitioner have already been withdrawn with the consent of the parties in the light of said agreement and in view of that criminal revision may kindly be allowed in terms of compromise for which I.A. No. 2820 of 2025 has been filed. He further submits that since the matter is arising out of matrimonial dispute and now compromise has taken place in view of that judgment of conviction and order of sentence may kindly be set aside.

¶14

Learned counsel for the State submits that compromise is there in the light of averment made in the said I.A.

¶15

Learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 submits that matter is arising out of matrimonial dispute and mutual divorce order has been passed and the O.P. No.2 has received Rs. four lakh in terms of agreement. She further submits that O.P. No.2 may kindly be allowed to withdraw the demand draft of Rs. two lakh deposited before the learned Registrar General in view of earlier order of the Coordinate Bench. She submits that matter can be disposed of by way of setting aside the impugned judgments.

¶16

The matter is arising out of matrimonial dispute and now good

¶17

sense has prevailed between the parties and compromise has taken place for

¶18

¶19

 ( 2025:JHHC:31647 )

¶20

that the aforesaid I.A. has been filed and payment of Rs. four lakh has already been made to the O.P. No.2 and remaining Rs. two lakh by way of demand draft has been deposited before the learned Registrar General in terms of order dated 25.07.2025.

¶21

In course of argument it has been pointed out that said demand draft will expire on 17.10.2025 and in view of that the Registrar General shall release the said demand draft to the learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 to hand over the said demand draft to the O.P. No.2 so that before expiry of the said demand draft the O.P. No.2 may encash the said demand draft.

¶22

In view of above and considering the matter is arising out of matrimonial dispute and now compromise has reached between the parties and in view of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “ Narinder Singh & Ors. Versus State of Punjab & Anr., reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, and in the case of “ Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.” reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 , the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 15.03.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Seraikella in Cr. Appeal No. 02/2022 and judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.03.2020 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella Kharsawan in Seraikella P.S. Case No. 80/2017, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 540/2017, T.R. No. 322 of 2020 are set aside.

¶23

This criminal revision is allowed and disposed of. Pending I.A. if any, stands disposed of.

¶24

Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned Registrar General in course of day for needful.

¶25

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶26

Dated. 14.10.2025 Satyarthi-

¶27

Shekh Ijhar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shekh Ijhar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rahbar Ali Vs Nilofer Perween

Ujjwal Kumar Sahu Alias Ujjal Kumar Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dipak Sonar Vs State of Jharkhand

Jai Ram Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kuleshwar Kumar Alias Kuleshwar Dada Vs State of Jharkhand

Imam Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand