Patna High Court
Dabloo Kumar @ Shanti Sagar vs Reema Kumari on 9 January, 2025
Author: P. B. Bajanthri
Bench: P. B. Bajanthri, Ashok Kumar Pandey
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Appeal No.341 of 2019
======================================================
Dabloo Kumar @ Shanti Sagar, S/o Vishwanath Prasad, R/o Machharahatta
Gali, Opp. Anpurna Mandir, Patna City, P.O. - Jhaugang, P.S.- Khajekalan,
Ranipur Milki Chak, Patna City, Patna- 800003.
... ... Appellant.
Versus
Reema Kumari, W/o Dabloo Kumar @ Shanti Sagar, D/o Mithlesh Prasad,
R/o Amber Sikhana, P.S.- Biharsarif, Biharsarif, Nalanda, Bihar.
... ... Respondent.
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Ravi Kumar, Advocate.
For the Respondent : Mr.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI)
Date : 09-01-2025
The appellant has assailed the Judgment of the
Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna, dated
28.04.2018
passed in Matrimonial Case No.5628 of 2014.
2. Appellant and respondent married on 19.02.2007.
Respondent gave birth to a son on 28.07.2008. It is alleged that
respondent left matrimonial home on 29.06.2011, resultantly,
appellant is stated to have filed a petition for restitution of
conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act on
12.07.2011. However, for non-appearance of respondent,
appellant had withdrawn Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act
petition. Thereafter, he has filed a petition for decree of divorce
Patna High Court MA No.341 of 2019 dt.09-01-2025
on the score of cruelty on 23.07.2014 before the Principal
Judge, Family Court, Patna.
3. Perusal of the records, it is evident that there are no
specific alleged cruelty meted out to the appellant on behalf of
the respondent except in paragraph-12 of the plaint. In
paragraph-12 of the plaint, it is stated as under:
"12. ;g fd e/;LFkrk dsUnz esa le>kSrs ds ckn foi{kh
ds vkosnd ds ?kj vkus ds mijkUr foi{kh ds joS;s
esa dksbZ cnyko ugha vk;k rFkk vkosnd dks lkl
llqj /kedh nsus yxs fd rqEgsa pSu ls ugha thus
nsaxs cckZn dj gh ne ysaxsA vkosnd dks foi{kh ,oa
muds ifjokj ds }kjk "kkjhfjd ,oa ekufld :i
ls "kknh ds i"pkr~ izrkfM+r fd;k tkrk jgkA
mijksDr vk"k; ds lwpukFkZ fo}ku eq[;
U;k0n.Mk0 fcgkj"kjhQ ¼ukyUnk½ ds U;k;ky; esa
fnukad 21&03&2013 dks lwpuk i= la[;k&
537@2013 nkf[ky fd;kA "
4. Other than the aforementioned alleged allegation,
there are no specific dates and events. In fact, paragraph-12 is
very vaguely averred in the plaint/petition. Cruelty is required
to be examined in the light of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's
decision in the case of Samar Ghosh Versus Jaya Ghosh,
reported in (2007)4 Supreme Court Cases 511, in which
detailed analysis has been made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
5. Taking note of the principles laid down by the
Patna High Court MA No.341 of 2019 dt.09-01-2025
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforementioned decision, the
appellant has not made out a case of cruelty against the
respondent so as to seek decree of divorce. None other
contentions are urged in support of the present Miscellaneous
Appeal.
6. In the light of these facts and circumstances, the
appellant has not made out a case so as to interfere with the
Judgment of the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court,
Patna, dated 28.04.2018 passed in Matrimonial Case No.5628 of
2014.
7. Accordingly, the present Miscellaneous Appeal stands
dismissed.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
( Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
P.S./-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 20.01.2025.
Transmission Date NA
