4 min readNew DelhiMar 18, 2026 10:24 AM ISTWhile the family court had initially dismissed the husband’s suit, the Jharkhand High Court determined that the couple’s marriage had reached a point of no return. (Image generated using AI)Jharkhand High Court news: Emphasising that no purpose will be served in a “lifeless” marital relationship without practical value, the Jharkhand High Court has granted divorce to a couple separated for over two decades, while ensuring the financial security of the wife and daughter through a Rs 50 lakh alimony award.A division bench of Justices Sujit Narayan Prasad and Arun Kumar Rai was hearing the plea of a husband challenging the family court order that had dismissed his divorce petition. Justices Sujit Narayan Prasad and Arun Kumar Rai stated that when both parties are not interested in living together, the court can’t compel them to do so.“The marital relationship between the parties has become a ‘dead wood marriage,’ and the marital relationship has become lifeless and without emotional or practical value,” the court said on March 12.Also Read | P stands for public: Why Jharkhand High Court rejected man’s PIL over medical negligence in father’s treatmentNoting that the unmarried daughter is planning to pursue her higher studies and for that a substantial amount of alimony is required, the court added that, being the father, he has a duty to maintain his daughter and to discharge his accountability to bring his daughter to a responsible position in society.The bench noted that we all know that a child, particularly a female, is in need of financial means for her study, upbringing, higher studies, and solemnisation of marriage.BackgroundThe appellant originally moved the family court in Jamshedpur seeking a decree of divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, on the grounds of cruelty and desertion.The parties were married in 1998, but the relationship deteriorated shortly after the birth of their daughter in 1999.The husband alleged that the respondent-wife had deserted him for the majority of the last two decades and had subjected him to mental and physical torture, including the filing of a criminal case in which the husband and his parents were eventually acquitted in 2019.While the family court had initially dismissed the husband’s suit, the high court determined that the marriage had reached a point of no return.The parties have been living separately for approximately 20 years, leading the court to classify the union as a “dead wood marriage”.Also Read | Lawyer v. Lawyer: Jharkhand High Court rejects transfer plea in cross-FIR case, says ‘speedy trial not prejudicial’Permanent alimonyThe concept of permanent alimony as provided under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 have been enacted with the object of removing the hardship of the wife or the husband with no independent income sufficient for living or meeting litigation expenses.The apex court, taking note of the quantum of permanent alimony fixed by the high court, has come to the conclusion that it requires revision.The said revision is on the basis of the respondent husband’s income, financial disclosures, and past earnings, which establish that he is in a position to pay a higher amount.The respondent-wife has to survive for her livelihood as well as take care of the upbringing and better education of the daughter, solely on the amount of permanent alimony so given by the appellant-husband.The wife is only 44 years of age and taking into life expectancy of even 72 years, she has to survive for a long 28 years on the amount of permanent alimony given by her husband, beating inflation, etc.Also Read | ‘False allegations of impotency against husband mental cruelty’: Jharkhand High Court upholds man’s divorce over ‘anguish‘Marital relation lifeless’The marital relationship between the parties has become a “dead wood marriage”, and the marital relationship has become lifeless and without emotional or practical value.When a marriage is deemed a dead wood situation, the courts may consider it a valid reason to grant a divorce, recognising that forcing a couple to remain in such a relationship only prolongs their suffering, and no purpose will be served in sailing the dead wood.The question is that when both parties are not at all interested in living together, then this court cannot compel them to live together.Jagriti Rai works with The Indian Express, where she writes from the vital intersection of law, gender, and society. Working on a dedicated legal desk, she focuses on translating complex legal frameworks into relatable narratives, exploring how the judiciary and legislative shifts empower and shape the consciousness of citizens in their daily lives. Expertise Socio-Legal Specialization: Jagriti brings a critical, human-centric perspective to modern social debates. Her work focuses on how legal developments impact gender rights, marginalized communities, and individual liberties. Diverse Editorial Background: With over 4 years of experience in digital and mainstream media, she has developed a versatile reporting style. Her previous tenures at high-traffic platforms like The Lallantop and Dainik Bhaskar provided her with deep insights into the information needs of a diverse Indian audience. Academic Foundations: Post-Graduate in Journalism from the Indian Institute of Mass Communication (IIMC), India’s premier media training institute. Master of Arts in Ancient History from Banaras Hindu University (BHU), providing her with the historical and cultural context necessary to analyze long-standing social structures and legal evolutions. ... Read More © IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd