Disposed¶33

Punam Devi v. Satish Kumar Panda

Jharkhand HC18 Jul 2025FA/312/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

First Appeal No.312 of 2019, Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi, decided 18.07.2025 (2025:JHHC:19723-DB); judicial separation decree under Section 10(1)/13-A Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 set aside on matrimonial settlement and reconciliation between husband (Satish Kumar Panda) and wife (Punam Devi); appeal under Section 19(1) Family Courts Act, 1984 against Family Court, Ranchi judgment in Original Suit No.436 of 2016 closed and disposed; withdrawal of Section 498(A) IPC case (Murhu P.S. Case No.76 of 2016) undertaken by wife within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Family Court judgment dated 27.06.2019 and decree dated 10.07.2019 in Original Suit No.436 of 2016 set aside; instant appeal closed and consequently disposed of; wife to seek withdrawal of Murhu P.S. Case No.76 of 2016 within two weeks. ¶33

Punam Devi Vs Satish Kumar Panda — Matrimonial and Divorce | Jharkhand HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶33

Issue for consideration

Whether, in view of the settlement arrived at between the husband and the wife, the Family Court judgment dated 27.06.2019 and decree dated 10.07.2019 of judicial separation should be set aside and the appeal closed. +1 more

¶15

Court's answer

In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the judgment dated 27.06.2019 and decree dated 10.07.2019 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi in Original Suit No.436 of 2016 (judicial separation) were set aside.

¶32

Ratio / Principle

As a term of the settlement-closure, if the wife files an application within two weeks for withdrawal of Murhu P.S. Case No.76 of 2016, the concerned Court is to pass necessary orders as soon as possible, preferably on the next date fixed.

¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Division Bench of the High Court of Jharkhand (Sujit Narayan Prasad and Rajesh Kumar, JJ.) in First Appeal No.312 of 2019 under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, challenging the judgment dated 27.06.2019 and decree dated 10.07.2019 of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi in Original Suit No.436 of 2016 granting judicial separation under Section 10(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 r/w Section 13-A. During pendency, the Court facilitated settlement: by order dated 09.07.2025 both spouses agreed to live together in the matrimonial home with their children, and the wife accordingly returned on 09.07.2025. The respondent-husband pointed out the pending Murhu P.S. Case No.76 of 2016 under Section 498(A) IPC before the S.D.J.M., Khunti, whereupon the appellant-wife undertook to withdraw it within two weeks, with a direction that the concerned Court pass necessary orders promptly on such an application. Holding that a settlement had been arrived at between the parties, the Division Bench set aside the Family Court judgment and decree and closed and disposed of the appeal.

¶1

2025:JHHC:19723-DB

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI First Appeal No.312 of 2019

¶3

¶4

Punam Devi, age 31 years, wife of Sri Satish Kumar Panda, daughter of Late Gajadhar Kar C/o-Narendra Nath Kar, resident of village-Darla, P.O. Sundari, P.S Murhu, District-Khunti, Jharkhand …. …. Appellant

¶5

-Versus-

¶6

Satish Kumar Panda, son of Sri Bishwanath Panda, resident of Village-Pugru Tupudana Chowk, P.O & P.S. Dhurwa, O.P-Tupudana, District-Ranchi, Jharkhand

¶7

…. …. Respondent

¶8

¶9

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

¶10

¶11

For the Appellant : Mr. Alok Raj, Advocate : Mr. Shadab Eqbal, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate : Ms. Asiwhwariya Priya, Adv.

¶12

¶13

Order No.17/Dated: 18^th July, 2025

¶14

1. This appeal filed under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is directed against the judgment dated 27.06.2019 and decree dated 10.07.2019 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi in Original Suit No.436 of 2016 whereby and whereunder the learned Family Court has passed the order of judicial separation under Section 10(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 r/w Section 13-A thereof.

¶15

2. This Court, in order to consider the issue of settlement as was agitated on behalf of the learned counsels for the parties, had called upon the husband and the wife.

¶16

3. Both, the husband and the wife had appeared and agreed to live together by giving respect to each other as would be evident from the order dated 09^th July, 2025. For reference the order dated 09^th July, 2025 reads as under:-

¶17

“1. In pursuance of the order dated 23.06.2025, both the parties, the husband and the wife, have appeared before this Court.

¶18

1 (F.A No.312 of 2019)

¶19

2025:JHHC:19723-DB

¶20

2. The husband and the wife, both, after interacting with this Court, are ready to live together in the matrimonial home along with daughter and son, who is studying in the boarding school.

¶21

3. Both, the husband and the wife, have consented to go together from the Court itself to their own house situated at Tupudana (matrimonial home).

¶22

4. This Court thought it proper to list this case on 18.07.2025.

¶23

5. Both the parties will appear physically before this Court on the next date fixed .”

¶24

4. The wife had gone to her matrimonial home along with her husband on 09^th July, 2025 and both the parties have appeared today before this Court.

¶25

5. The husband has submitted that the wife is living with him in the matrimonial home and he is also giving due respect which is to be given to a wife by her husband. The wife is also taking care of the entire family members in her matrimonial home, including the eighty years old mother.

¶26

6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-husband has submitted that one criminal case bearing Murhu P.S. Case No.76 of 2016, registered under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code is lying pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M, Khunti.

¶27

7. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant-wife has undertaken before this Court that the said criminal case will be withdrawn by her within two weeks. She has also submitted that she will make endeavour for withdrawal of the said case by appending a copy of the order which is being passed today.

¶28

8. If an application for withdrawal of the same is filed within two weeks, the concerned Court will pass necessary order as soon as possible preferably on the next date fixed.

¶29

9. Learned counsel appearing for both the parties and the parties in person, have submitted that the case may be closed in view of the fact that both, the husband and the wife, are living together in the matrimonial home.

¶30

2 (F.A No.312 of 2019)

¶31

2025:JHHC:19723-DB

¶32

10. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the judgment dated 27.06.2019 and decree dated 10.07.2019 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi in Original Suit No.436 of 2016 is hereby, set-aside.

¶33

11. The instant appeal is hereby, closed and consequently, disposed of.

¶34

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶35

(Rajesh Kumar, J.)

¶36

A.Mohanty/Raja Uploaded

¶37

3 (F.A No.312 of 2019)

Punam Devi v. Satish Kumar Panda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Punam Devi v. Satish Kumar Panda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Basant Das Alias Basant Kr. Das Vs State of Bihar

M/S Shiv Jyoti Entp. Jv Binod Kumar Lal Alias Shiv Jyoti Entp. Thr Its Partner, Dilip Kumar Ray Vs the State of Jharkhand

Banshi Das Vs State of Bihar

Yaswant Kumar Vs Sharda Vandna

Somnath Chatterjee Vs State of Jharkhand through Its Secretary, Department of Home

Smt Pramodini Mahanta Vs Subash Chandra Mahanta