2025:JHHC:33533 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.M.P. No. 439 of 2025 ------ Nikita Tiwari, daughter of Nagendar Tiwary, wife of Sisir Chandra Shekhar, resident of Quarter No.230, Sector 1/B, Bokaro Steel City, P.O. and P.S. Bokaro Steel City, District Bokaro .... .... …. Petitioner Versus Sishir Chandra Shekhar, son of Shree Niwas Ojha, resident of Mohalla Ranjan Path, Lane No.10, near Sheo Mandir, Gola Road, P.O. and P.S. Rupasur, District Patna, Bihar .... .... .... Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the O.P. No.2 : Ms. Sushila Kumari, Advocate Order No.06 / Dated : 10.11.2025 Instant civil miscellaneous petition is filed for quashing the order dated 17.01.2024 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro in Original Suit No.14/2023. Petitioner/respondent filed the suit for divorce under Section 13(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in which learned Family Court examined the opposite party and discharged him from his further cross-examination. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel on behalf of petitioner that the date was fixed on 17.01.2024 for cross-examination of the respondent, who happens to be the husband of this petitioner. As no interim maintenance amount had been paid under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 therefore, the petitioner prayed the Court to defer the cross- examination till the payment of the maintenance amount, which has been rejected, hence this civil miscellaneous petition. It is submitted that she is ready to cross-examine the witness provided one adjournment is granted. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel on behalf of the opposite party/plaintiff that at the first instance, the petitioner refused to cross- examine the witness and this petition for cross-examine the witness was filed after eleven months which discloses the intention to only delay and procrastinate the trial. Husband is Class I officer in Railway and on the last occasion, when he had come for his evidence, a false FIR had been lodged under Section 498A of the IPC and other Sections. It is contended that opposite party apprehends harassment and false implication. It is also submitted that the interim maintenance is being paid. 2025:JHHC:33533 4. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of both sides, it is trite law that unless the witness is examined and cross-examined, the deposition cannot be read as evidence. However, where the defendant deliberately refuses to cross-examine the witness, consequently witness is discharged, the said examination-in-chief can be read into evidence. 5. Instant case arises out of matrimonial dispute and the petitioner will be seriously prejudiced on being no opportunity of cross-examination is granted. 6. Under the circumstance, civil miscellaneous petition is allowed. It is clarified that learned Family Court will not grant any adjournment. Let this case be listed before the Court below on 09.12.2025, if on the date of appearance of the witness for any reason counsel appearing on behalf of the present petitioner refuses to cross-examine, the witness will be discharged. Pending Interlocutory Application, if any, is disposed of. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Anit Uploaded 12.11.2025