2025:JHHC:20194 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No.528 of 2024 Manoj Keshri, son of Sri Narayan Sao Keshri, resident of At Bangali Toli, Ramgarh, PO, PS and District--Ramgarh, Jharkhand. .... .. ... Petitioner(s) Versus 1. Priya Kumari aged about 27 year wife of Manoj Keshri and daughter of Late Narayan Prasad resident of At Station Road, Jhumri Telaiya, PO- Jhumri Telaiya, PS- Telaiya, District-Koderma, Jharkhand 2. The State of Jharkhand. .. ... ...Opp. Party(s) ........... CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY ......... For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Baleshwar Yadav, Advocate For the State : Mr. Someshwar Roy, APP For the O.P. No.2 : Md. Sajid Yunus, Advocate Mr. Navin Kr. Singh, Advocate …... 14/ 23.07.2025. Heard, learned counsel for the parties. 1. The instant Cr. Revision has been filed against the order dated 17.01.2024 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Koderma in Original Maintenance Case No.06/ 2023 whereby and whereunder maintenance of Rs.4,000/- per month has been allowed under Section 125 Cr. P.C. in favour of O.P. No.1. 2. Petitioner is the husband, who has preferred the instant Cr. Revision petition against the impugned order. 3. Earlier vide order dated 05.05.2025, on the request of both the sides, the matter was referred for mediation which has been successful. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that under the terms of settlement, it was agreed that a suit will be filed with mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act and further both the parties had agreed for divorce by way of one time settlement of Rs.9 Lakhs. It is further submitted that in terms of settlement, the application for divorce has already been filed by both the sides and 1st instalment had already been paid as per the terms of the settlement. 5. Learned counsel for the O.P. No.2 does not dispute the factual assertion made on behalf of the petitioner. 2025:JHHC:20194 2 6. The instant Cr. Revision stands disposed of in terms of the settlement made by both the parties. It goes without saying that if the petitioner fails to comply with the terms of settlement, the O.P. No.2 will have a right to move the Family Court for compliance with the terms of settlement. Pending I.A, if any, stands disposed of. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sandeep/