SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 19175

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Rasida Bano – Appellant
Versus
Mohd. Amin and 4 others – Respondent
FAM/35/2017



NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR FAM No. 35 of 2017 Reserved On 23/09/2025 Delivered On 21/11/2025

1 - Rasida Bano Aged About 54 Years Divorced Wife Of Mohd. Amin, Caste Muslim Sunni, R/o Village Umjhar, Post And Tahsil Baikunthpur, District Koria, Chhattisgarh ...............Defendant No.1, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - Mohd. Amin S/o Late Mohd. Yasin, Aged About 58 Years Caste Musalman Sunni, Occupation Service, Senior Ovarman, S E C L Charcha R.O., R/o Charcha, Post Line Quarter No.144, Tahsil Baikunthpur, District Koria, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - Rihana Begum D/o Miraj Bilal Bek, Aged About 39 Years W/o Amin Khan, Caste Musalman, R/o Charcha, Post Line Quarter No.144, Tahsil Baikunthpur, District Koria, Chhattisgarh ................Plaintiffs, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh 3 - Chief General Manager, S E C L Near Kachhahri, Baikunthpur, District Koria, Chhattisgarh, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh 4 - Sub Area Manager, Charcha R.O. Tahsil Baikunthpur, District Koria, Chhattisgarh, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh

5 - Chief Personnel Manager, S E C L Baikunthpur Area, Office Of The Chief General Manager, Near Kachhahri, Baikunthpur, District Koria, Chhattisgarh ................Defendant No.2 To 4, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. G. M. Hasan, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 : None despite service of notice For Respondents No.3 : Mr. Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate along with Azka Alam, to 5 : Advocate Amicus Curiae Mr. Ali Asgar, Advocate (Division Bench)

Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

C A V Order

Per , Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J.

1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-wife, being aggrieved by the judgment dated 21.12.2016 (Annexure A/1), passed by the Presiding Officer Prabhat Shastri Judge, Family Court, District Koria (C.G.), in Civil Suit No.64A of 2014, whereby the Family Court allowed the said suit in part and granted a decree of divorce.

2. In this case, It is an admitted and undisputed fact that both parties profess the Muslim faith. Approximately thirty years ago, the applicant, Smt. Rasida Bano, was lawfully married to the non- applicant. From their matrimonial union, three sons were born, including Applicant No. 2, Aftab Alam. It is further an undisputed fact that Aftab Alam has been visually impaired (blind) since birth, and that the non-applicant is presently employed with South Eastern Coalfields Limited (SECL).

3. Facts of the present case, in brevity, are that the alleged divorce between respondent No. 1 and the appellant, the respondent Nos. 1 and 2/plaintiffs (hereinafter referred to as “the plaintiffs”) instituted a suit before the learned Family Court, Baikunthpur, District Koria (C.G.) under the provisions of the Specific Relief Act, seeking a decree of divorce against the appellant and further direction to the South Eastern Coalfields Limited (SECL) authorities to substitute the name of plaintiff No. 2 in place of the appellant in the relevant official records. It is an admitted fact that the marriage between plaintiff No. 1 and the appellant, Smt. Rasida Bano, was solemnized in accordance with Muslim Law on 12.03.1981, and from their wedlock, three sons were born, all of whom have now attained majority. It is also undisputed that during the subsistence of marriage, plaintiff No. 1 nominated the appellant and their children in various financial schemes and paid the consideration amount for the purchase of land bearing Khasra Nos. 14 and 322, admeasuring 1.194 hectares, purchased in the appellant’s name in the year 1986. The plaintiffs have further averred that after about five to seven years of marriage, the appellant began quarrelling with plaintiff No. 1, leveled false allegations against him, and even attempted to defame him by associating his name with one lady named Radha, thereby subjecting him to social and mental harassment

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top