IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI F.A. No.50 of 2023 -------

Jyoti, [Aged about 35 years] Wife of Raja Nand Choudhary, Resident

1.

of: -C/o Subodh Chandra Jha, Bajrang Colony, Pokhna Tilha, Ward No.18, Near: Hindi Vidyapith, Post Office: Deoghar, Police Station:

Deoghar, Sub Division: -Deoghar, District-Deoghar … … Appellant/Opposite Party Versus Sri Raja Nand Choudhary, Son of: -Bishnu Deo Choudhary, Resident of: -House No.9, Williams Town, Indu Bhushan Sarkar Road, Deoghar, Post Office: Deoghar, Police Station: Deoghar, Sub Division:

- Deoghar, District-Deoghar … … Respondent/Petitioner With F.A. No.06 of 2023 -------

Rajanand Choudhary, aged about 42 years, son of Bishnudeo

2.

Choudhary, resident of Indu Bhushan Sarkar Road, House No.9, Williams Town, P.O. & P.S. Deoghar, District Deoghar, State Jharkhand … … Petitioner/Appellant Versus Jyoti @ Golden, aged about 31 years, wife of Rajanand Choudhary and daughter of Subodh Chandra Jha, A-6 Manager, Jharkhand Co- operative Bank, resident of Pandit Binoda Nand Jha Path, presently resident of Pokhna Tilha, Bajrang Colony, Deoghar, P.O. & P.S.

Deoghar, subdivision and District Deoghar, State Jharkhand … … Opposite Party/Respondent -------

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI -------

For the Appellant : Mr. Rajesh Lala, Advocate Mr. Kumar Nishant, Advocate (In F.A. No.50/2023)

: Mrs. Niharika Mazumdar, Advocate (In F.A. No.06/2023)

For the Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Lala, Advocate Mr. Kumar Nishant, Advocate (In F.A. No.06/2023)

Mrs. Niharika Mazumdar, Advocate (In F.A. No.50/2023)

----------------------------

CAV on 30/10/2025 Pronounced on 21/11/2025 Per Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

1. At the outset, it needs to refer herein that vide order dated 20.03.2025 passed in F.A. No. 06 of 2023, the appeals being F.A. No.50 of 2023 and F.A. No.06 of 2023, have been directed to be listed together and as such, are being taken up together, for ready reference, the order dated

20.03.2025 is being quoted herein which reads as under:

“11/20.03.2025 Since it has been submitted that in the appeal which is with respect to custody of the child, both the parties have been directed to appear before us on 16.04.2025, let this matter be listed along with F.A. No. 50 of 2023 on

16.04.2025.”

2. The appeal being F.A. No.50 of 2023 preferred by the appellant-wife against the judgment/decree by which “shared parenting” has been ordered by the Family Court, Deoghar, on the petition filed by the respondent husband under Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act.

3. The appeal being F.A. No.06 of 2023 has been filed by the appellant- husband against the denial of the prayer for dissolution of marriage on the ground of ‘cruelty’.

4. It appears from the order dated 12^th June, 2025 passed in F.A. No.50/2023 by this Court that the both the parties have submitted that since reunion is not possible and as such, the matter may be heard on merits, for ready reference, the order dated 12.06.2025 is being quoted as under:

“Order No.09/Dated: 12th June, 2025

1. The case has been taken up today. Both the wife and husband are present in the Court pursuant to the order dated

08.05.2025.

2. We, after, interaction both of them has found that there is no solution with respect to resolution of matrimonial dispute and as such, both the parties have submitted that the mater may be heard on merits.

3. Accordingly, list this case on 07th July, 2025 for hearing on merits.”

5. Considering the aforesaid, this Court is now going to appreciate the aforesaid appeals on merit.

6. This Court, taking into consideration the ground which has been taken for dissolution of marriage on merit, i.e., the ground of cruelty, hence, is of the view that appeal being F.A. No.06 of 2023 is to be considered first.

F.A. No.06 of 2023 Prayer

7. The instant appeal being F.A. No.06 of 2023 has been filed under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, challenging the legality and propriety of impugned judgment passed on 26.09.2022 a