Jharkhand High Court
Vivek Kumar Mundal @ Vivek Kumar vs The State Of Jharkhand on 9 October, 2025
Author: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
2025:JHHC:31317
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No.1009 of 2024
Vivek Kumar Mundal @ Vivek Kumar, aged about 31 years, son of Shri
Ramesh Kumar Mundal @ Rajesh Kumar, Resident of village-
Bandhdih, P.O.- Bandhdih, P.S. - Jaridih, District- Bokaro (Jharkhand)
... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Punrima Kumari, wife of Vivek Kumar Mundal, daughter of Radhey
Shyam Mundal, resident of Near Radha Rani Mandir, Kulsud, P.O.
Lota, P.S. silli, District - Ranchi. ... Opp. Parties
--------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sahil, Advocate.
For the State : Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, APP
For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Pran Pranay, Advocate
------
4/09.10.2025 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned
counsel appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for the
O.P. No.2.
2. This criminal revision has been preferred against the order dated
21.07.2023 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi
in Original Maintenance Case No. 262 of 2022, whereby learned the
Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi ex-parte allowed the petition
filed by Opposite Party No.2 under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. and
directed the petitioner to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 12,000/-
per month to the Opposite Party No.2 from the date of filing and he
further directed that the arrears of maintenance would be paid within
six months from the date of the judgment and also directed to pay
lump sum Rs. 5,000/- towards litigation cost.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the
marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with the opposite party
2025:JHHC:31317
No.2 on 28.04.2017 according to Hindu Rites and Customs and they
lived together as husband and wife for some time. Further matrimonial
disputes arose between the parties. He further submits that due to
matrimonial dispute, the petitioner filed a matrimonial suit for
dissolution of marriage between the petitioner and Opposite Party
No.2 on 19.05.2022 being Original Suit No. 283 of 2022 before the
learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro. He further submits in
the aforesaid suit, notices were issued to Opposite Party No.2, but
despite several notice, she never appeared in the case and the suit was
heard ex-parte and judgment and decree for dissolution of marriage
was passed on 24.05.2023 with a direction to the petitioner for
payment of Rs. 3,00,000/- to the Opposite Party No.2 as one-time
permanent alimony. He further submits that the said ex-parte
Judgment has been challenged by the opposite party No.2 in F.A.
No.42 of 2025 and the Division Bench of this Court has sent the
matter for mediation before Mediator of JHALSA and before the
Mediator, the matter has been settled between the petitioner and
opposite party No.2.
4. In course of argument, he produced the order dated 15.09.2025
passed in F.A. No.42 of 2025. Let the same be kept on record. He then
submits that in the said order, the terms and conditions are
incorporated in para-4 of the said order. He also submits that in para-5,
the quantum of alimony has been discussed in the said order. He
further submits in Para-6 of the said order, petitioner herein has paid a
demand draft of Rs.7,00,000/- to the opposite party No.2. Rest of the
2025:JHHC:31317
amount to the tune of Rs.8,00,000/- has been agreed to pay by 9th of
October 2025. He further submits that in view of that observation, the
petitioner has come with a bank draft of Rs.8,00,000/- in the name of
opposite party No.2 namely Purnima Kumari. He submits in view of
the compromise and in terms of alimony, the impugned order may
kindly be set-aside.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the State appearing through V.C.
submits that it appears that the compromise has taken place.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No.2 accepts
the submission of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and
submits that one time settlement has already been made. The opposite
party No.2 has received a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- earlier. He submits
that the opposite party No.2 is ready to take the bank draft of
Rs.8,00,000/- and he also submits that the matter can be disposed of in
light of the compromise.
7. In view of the above, it transpires that the compromise has
taken place and in the Division Bench Order dated 15.09.2025, the
terms and condition of compromise has already been discussed in
Para-4, the quantum of alimony and earlier payment has been
disclosed in Para 5 & 6 of the said order. In the course of court
proceeding, Bank Draft of Rs.8,00,000/- has been handed over to Mr.
Pran Pranay, learned counsel appearing for O.P. No.2, who will hand
over the same to Purnima Kumari, who is opposite party No.2.
8. In view of the above and considering the submissions of the
learned counsel for the parties as well as looking into the Division
2025:JHHC:31317
Bench Order, wherein everything has been recorded and further
considering that the petitioner has paid a bank draft of Rs.8,00,000/-
today in course of court proceeding, the order dated 21.07.2023
passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi in Original
Maintenance Case No. 262 of 2022 is hereby set-aside.
9. This revision petition is allowed and disposed of in above terms.
10. When this order has already been passed, the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner has pointed out that in the light of the
direction of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro, a sum
of Rs.12,000/- is being deducted from the account of the petitioner
continuously and this month also, i.e. October 2025, Rs.12,000/- has
already been deducted.
11. In view of the allowing of this petition, the further deduction
shall not be made from the account of the petitioner as one time
alimony has been settled with consent of the parties.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
09.10.2025
R.Kumar
