IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
R.D. DHANUKA, J.
Anil Yashwant Karande - Appellant
Versus
Smt. Mangal Anil Karande - Respondent
Second Appeal Nos. 396 & 397 of 2013
Decided on : 23-12-2015
Cruelty - Hindu Marriage Act - Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 of IPC - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the implications of filing a false complaint under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and its impact on the mental well-being of the accused. The judgment highlighted the findings of the Criminal Court, the evidence presented, and the acquittal of the accused, which led to the conclusion that the complaint was false and filed with an intention to defame. The court also considered the principles of mental cruelty and the entitlement to claim divorce based on such grounds.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant and the respondent got married as per Hindu Rites and Rituals. The respondent alleged that she was forced to leave the matrimonial house and filed a complaint under sections 498A, 323, 504, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant and his family members. The appellant and his family members were subsequently acquitted. The appellant filed a Hindu Marriage Petition seeking annulment of marriage and divorce, while the respondent filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the complaint filed by the respondent was false and filed with an intention to defame the appellant and his family members. The court held that the appellant had proved the cruelty committed by the respondent, entitling him to a decree of divorce under section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The court dismissed the respondent's petition for restitution of conjugal rights.
Issues: The issues revolved around the implications of filing a false complaint under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, the concept of mental cruelty, and the entitlement to claim divorce based on such grounds. The court also addressed the conflicting petitions for annulment of marriage, divorce, and restitution of conjugal rights.
Ratio Decidendi: The court established that filing a false complaint under section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code constitutes mental cruelty, entitling the aggrieved party to claim divorce. The court also ruled that a spouse who has committed cruelty cannot seek restitution of conjugal rights at the same time.
Final Decision: The court allowed the second appeals, decreed the Hindu Marriage Petition filed by the appellant for annulment of marriage and divorce, and dismissed the respondent's petition for restitution of conjugal rights.
1. By these two second appeals, the appellant has impugned the order passed by the Lower Appellate Bench granting reliefs in favour of the respondent in two separate civil appeals filed by the respondent.
2. On or about 16th June, 2002 the marriage was performed between the appellant and the respondent as per Hindu Rites and Rituals. Pooja was organized after marriage on 21st June, 2002. It was alleged by the respondent that the respondent was forced to leave the matrimonial house along with her sisters by the appellant. It was the case of the respondent that on 30th June, 2002, the respondent and her relatives visited the house of the appellant when they were abused and the respondent was driven out of the matrimonial house.
3. On 12th August, 2002, an FIR came to be lodged by the respondent under sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant, his father, mother and brother. The appellant and his family members were arrested by the police pursuant to such complaint by the respondent. Pursuant to the said FIR, a Regular Criminal Case No.378 of 2002 was initiated against the appellant and his family members in the Court of IVth Joint Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sangli.
4. On 21st December, 2002, the respondent filed a petition under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. On 5th September, 2005, the appellant, his family members were acquitted in the Regular Criminal Case No.378 of 2002. The said order passed in the Regular Criminal Case No.378 of 2002 was not challenged.
5. On 10th March, 2006, the appellant herein filed a Hindu Marriage Petition (49 of 2006) against the respondent in the Court of learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Sangli inter-alia praying for annulment of marriage and for divorce. The said marriage petition was filed on various grounds including ground of cruelty alleged to have been committed by the respondent. The said Hindu Marriage Petition was resisted by the respondent. Both the proceedings were heard together and were disposed of by a common order. On 29th February, 2008, the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Sangli allowed the said Hindu Marriage Petition filed by the respondent under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights and rejected the Hindu Marriage Petition filed by the appellant inter-alia praying for annulment of the marriage and for divorce against the respondent. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order dated 29th February, 2008, the appellant herein filed two regular appeals before the learned District Judge, Sangli. By a common judgment and decree dated 18th January, 2012, the learned District Judge dismissed both the regular civil appeals filed by the appellant.
6. On 17th February, 2015, this Court admitted Second Appeal No.396 of 2013 and formulated following substantial questions of law :-
“Whether for the act of filing complaint under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code, to amount to mental cruelty on the acquittal of husband and family, it is essential that judgment of acquittal must find that the complaint filed was false and with an intention to defame ?”
7. In so far as Second Appeal No.397 of 2013 is concerned, while admitting the said second appeal, this Court formulated following substantial question of law:-
“Whether for the act of filing complaint under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code, to amount to mental cruelty on the acquittal of husband and family, it is essential that judgment of acquittal must find that the complaint filed was false and with an intention to defame ?”
8. Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel for the appellant invited my attention to the order passed by IVth Joint Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sangli in Regular Criminal Case No.378 of 2002 filed by the State of Maharashtra against the appellant and his family members alleging offences punishable under sections 498A, 323, 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code on 5th September, 2005. He submits that in
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.