[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Deepika vs Chandrapal Singh ... on 10 March, 2026
[2026:RJ-JD:11604-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1227/2025
Deepika W/o Chandrapal Singh, Aged About 26 Years, R/o
Hiradas, Vijaynagar Colony, Bharatpur, At Present Banda, Teh.
Taranagar, Dist. Churu.
----Appellant
Versus
Chandrapal Singh S/o Mohan Singh, R/o Hiradas, Vijaynagar
Colony, Bharatpur
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. S.S. Gaur
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Chanchal Solanki
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL
Order(Oral)
10/03/2026
(Per Sunil Beniwal,J.)
1. The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant
against Condition No. 1 imposed by the learned Family Court,
Additional District Judge, Taranagar, District Churu, while deciding
Civil Case No. 193/2021 vide judgment and decree dated
07.10.2024, whereby appellant-wife has been disentitled to seek
employment in government service on the basis of her status as a
divorcee.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant-wife filed a
petition under Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the respondent-
husband seeking dissolution of their marriage. The marriage
between the parties was solemnized on 31.10.2019 and
(Uploaded on 17/03/2026 at 04:18:56 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:11604-DB] (2 of 4) [CMA-1227/2025]
subsequently registered on 06.11.2019. However, within a short
period, disputes arose between them. Ultimately, the parties
mutually decided to dissolve the marriage and, in furtherance
thereof, executed an agreement dated 14.03.2020.
2.1 Despite the said agreement, the respondent-husband was
not willing to legally dissolve the marriage. Consequently, the
appellant-wife filed the aforesaid petition under Section 13(1)(a)
of the Act seeking divorce.
2.2 The said petition came to be allowed by the learned Family
Court vide judgment and decree dated 07.10.2024. However,
while granting the decree of divorce, the learned Court imposed a
condition that the appellant-wife would not be entitled to seek
employment in government service on the basis of her status as a
divorcee. Aggrieved by the imposition of the said condition, the
appellant/wife has preferred the present appeal.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant-wife, at the outset,
submits that the issue raised in the present appeal is no longer res
integra, in view of the judgment rendered by a Coordinate Bench
of this Court in Mamta Teli v. Ashok Kumar (D.B. Civil Misc.
Appeal No. 2346/2024), decided on 18.02.2025. It is
submitted that the Coordinate Bench has categorically held that
the imposition of such a condition is unjustified and unsustainable
in law.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-husband is
unable to dispute the aforesaid submission made on behalf of the
appellant.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.
(Uploaded on 17/03/2026 at 04:18:56 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:11604-DB] (3 of 4) [CMA-1227/2025]
6. The issue involved in the present appeal pertains to the
legality of the condition imposed by the Family Court, whereby the
appellant-wife has been restrained from seeking employment in
government service on the basis of her status as a divorcee. A
Coordinate Bench of this Court in Mamta Teli (supra) has held
such a condition to be unreasonable, while observing as under:-
"14. Thus, the impugned order dated 05.09.2023 passed by the
Family Court, Additional District Judge, Begun, District
Chittorgarh suffers from an infirmity in directing that the
appellant is not entitled to the benefit of being under single
lady/divorcee category, while recording that there is no
collusion between the parties. Thus, while upholding the
impugned order regarding the grant of divorce under Section
13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, the direction that the appellant
shall not be entitled for the public employment under the
divorcee category, is quashed and set aside.
15. It is made clear that the appellant shall be entitled for all
the benefits arising out her status of being a divorcee. It is
further made clear that in case at any point in time, any court
while dealing with the matrimonial cases, realizes that there is
collusion between the parties or some kind of fraud is being
played in the name of public employment under the garb of
divorce, then the courts shall be free to examine the same and
record a categorical finding to the effect before concluding that
the lady is not entitled for divorce and consequential
employment. It is also made clear that any kind of character
assassination or any kind of assessment qua her morality, shall
not be carried out to deprive her of any kind of protective
benefits of divorce as it is not called for to be done in a family
court for such purpose, particularly when Section 13-B and 13
of the Hindu Marriage Act are lawful propositions for the
purpose of public employment for the divorcee lady."
7. In view of the aforesaid discussion/view, with which we are
in respectful agreement, the present appeal deserves to be
allowed. Accordingly, Condition No. 1 imposed in the judgment
and decree dated 07.10.2024 is quashed and set aside. The
judgment and decree dated 07.10.2024 shall stand modified to
the aforesaid extent.
(Uploaded on 17/03/2026 at 04:18:56 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:11604-DB] (4 of 4) [CMA-1227/2025]
8. All pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(SUNIL BENIWAL),J (ARUN MONGA),J
154-skm/-
(Uploaded on 17/03/2026 at 04:18:56 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
