Sapna vs Ravi
2025 Latest Caselaw 4119 MP

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Sapna vs Ravi on 6 February, 2025

Author: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari

Bench: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari

         NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:3144




                                                              1                               FA-1698-2023
                              IN     THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT INDORE
                                                    BEFORE
                             HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI
                                                       &
                                     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH
                                                 ON THE 6 th OF FEBRUARY, 2025
                                                  FIRST APPEAL No. 1698 of 2023
                                                                SAPNA
                                                                Versus
                                                                 RAVI
                           Appearance:
                                   Shri Siddharth Jain, learned counsel for the appellant.
                                   Shri Harish Chandra Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent.

                                                                  ORDER

Per: Justice Gajendra Singh

This First Appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is preferred challenging the judgment and decree dated 06.03.2023 passed in RCS/HM/64/2022 by Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhar whereby petition for dissolution of marriage on the ground mentioned under Section 13(1)(ia)

(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been dismissed.

2 . Facts of the case in brief are that the appellant was married to the respondent on 21.04.2015 as per ceremony of Saptapadi solemnized in Bramhakundi, Dhar and a male child was born on 17.09.2016 from this wedlock and a petition for dissolution of marriage was preferred before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhar on 23.06.2022. The respondent was in custody and he was brought before the Court from District Jail Dhar through

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:3144

2 FA-1698-2023 production warrant and legal aid was provided to the respondent on 28.12.2022. On 12.06.2023, the right to file the reply was closed, thereafter, the petitioner was examined as PW-1 and case was closed and petition was dismissed recording the finding that the ground for dissolution of marriage is not proved.

3 . The first appeal is preferred on the ground that the trial Court committed error in not taking into consideration the fact that the marriage has been irretrievably broken down and there is no possibility for the reunion. The trial Court did not ignore the fact that the respondent is habitual offender and serving jail term amounts to mental cruelty to the appellant. The trial Court further committed error in holding that the respondent is in jail since

2021 and it cannot be construed as the desertion. The trial Court ignored the fact that unrebutted testimony cannot be displayed.

4 . Since, the respondent is in jail, therefore, the amicus curiae was appointed in this case to represent the respondent.

5 . Learned counsel for the amicus curiae appointed to help the respondent pointed out the procedural lacuna in this case and counsel for the appellant also agreed that in this case respondent was lodged in custody then his right to file the reply should not be forfeited and the matter should not be proceeded ex-parte against the respondent/husband.

Heard the learned counsels for the parties.

6 . Both the counsel prayed and their prayer is proper that the matter requires rehearing after affording proper opportunity to defend. Accordingly, the judgment and decree dated 06.03.2023 passed in RCS/HM/64/2022 is set

NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:3144

3 FA-1698-2023 aside and the matter is remanded back to the Family Court, Dhar with a direction that the respondent be afforded an opportunity to present his case through effective legal aid and respondent be facilitated either physically or through video conferencing to participate in the proceedings.

7 . Both the parties shall be at liberty to adduce evidence. 8 . In view of the aforesaid observation, the first appeal is disposed of. Certified copy as per rules.

                           (SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI)                        (GAJENDRA SINGH)
                                     JUDGE                                            JUDGE
                           VS