The Jharkhand High Court has upheld divorce decree granted to a Chittaranjan Locomotive Works employee against his wife of 51 years, while substantially raising the permanent alimony from Rs 10 lakh to Rs 40 lakh. The bench of Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Sanjay Prasad delivered the verdict on June 19, 2026, in a first appeal filed by the wife, Sandhya Devi, against her husband, Rajesh Kumar Singh.
Background of the Case
The couple married in 1984 under Hindu rites and lived together at Mihijam in Jamtara district. According to the husband's version, his wife was never comfortable with village life and would frequently leave for her parents' home without informing anyone. He claimed she walked out permanently in 1990, taking their infant daughter along, and never returned despite repeated attempts at reconciliation.
The wife told a completely different story. She alleged her husband had an affair with another woman, Sima Devi, and that she was thrown out of the matrimonial home over a dowry dispute. She had earlier filed a criminal case against him in 1992 under Section 498A IPC, which was eventually settled. A maintenance case followed in 2010, resulting in a compromise where the husband agreed to pay Rs 5,000 a month - later raised to Rs 6,000.
In 2019, the husband approached the Family Court in Jamtara seeking divorce on grounds of cruelty and desertion. The Family Court ruled in his favour in September 2022, dissolving the marriage and awarding Rs 10 lakh as one-time alimony. The wife challenged this before the High Court, arguing that the cruelty and desertion findings were wrong and that the compensation was far too low given her husband's government salary.
Court's Observations
The High Court examined testimony from both sides, including the couple's daughter, who supported her mother's claims. However, the bench found that the husband's account backed by his brother and two neighbours was more consistent, and that the wife herself admitted she would not return to him even if he asked.
On the legal question of desertion, the court explained that it isn't simply about a wife leaving a house - it requires an intention to permanently end the marriage, sustained over time. The judges noted that the wife had left her matrimonial home around 1990 after the birth of her daughter and that the parties had been living separately for 36 years.
Calling the marriage a "dead wood" relationship one that has lost all emotional or practical meaning the bench observed that forcing the couple to stay legally tied would only prolong unnecessary suffering. It reasoned that once a marriage reaches such a state, courts may treat it as valid grounds for divorce rather than making the parties continue in a lifeless union.
On the alimony issue, the court took a notably proactive step it added the General Manager of Chittaranjan Locomotive Works as a party to obtain official details of the husband's salary and retirement benefits. The affidavit revealed the husband, a Senior Technician (Loco Driver), earns around Rs 81,000 a month and is due to retire in August 2026 with retiral dues including gratuity, leave encashment, and provident fund totalling roughly Rs 38 lakh, plus a monthly pension of about Rs 29,300 with dearness relief.
The bench referred to several Supreme Court rulings, including Rajnesh v. Neha and the recent Rakhi Sadhukhan v. Raja Sadhukhan, which stress that alimony should reflect the standard of living a wife enjoyed during marriage and must not reduce her to financial hardship. The judges calculated that even a fraction of the husband's pension and retiral benefits, spread over the wife's likely remaining lifespan, would amount to several lakhs more than what the Family Court had granted.
Decision
The High Court confirmed the divorce decree passed by the Family Court, agreeing that cruelty and desertion had been established on facts. However, it modified the compensation, directing the husband to pay Rs 40 lakh as one-time permanent alimony instead of Rs 10 lakh. The amount is to be paid in four equal installments over 12 months, with the first installment due within a month of the order.
The court also gave the wife liberty to approach it again if the payments aren't made as directed.
Case Details
Case Title: Sandhya Devi v. Rajesh Kumar Singh
Case Number: First Appeal No. 126 of 2022
Court: Jharkhand High Court
Judge: Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Sanjay Prasad
Decision Date: June 19, 2026
