The institution of criminal cases against a wife's father and others on allegations of immorality, even if it does not amount to legal cruelty, can provide the wife with a reasonable excuse for withdrawing from the society of her husband, thereby defeating a petition for restitution of conjugal rights.

Kanhaiya Singh, J.

1. These two consolidated appeals arise out of two applications under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act (XXV of 1955) for the restitution of conjugal rights and have been heard analogously. In Miscellaneous Case 5 of 1957 giving rise to First Appeal 568 of 1958, Ram Chandra Mandal is the petitioner and his wife Urmila Devi is the opposite first party. In Miscellaneous case 6 of 1957. out of which First Appeal 567 of 1958 has arisen, Gopi Mandal is the petitioner and his wife Putul Devi is the opposite first party. Both the petitioners are full brothers and their wives are also full sisters. Gudri Mandal, the father of the two girls, is impleaded as opposite second party. I may state that Nokhey Mandal and Dasrath all also had been impleaded as opposite second party in both the cases.

Both the husbands had instituted criminal cases for prosecution of Gudri Mandal, Nokhey Mandal and Dasrath Lall under Sec. 498 of the Penal Code on the allegations that they, in collusion with one another, were detaining their wives for immoral purposes and for remarriage, but those cases ended in acquittal on 4-10-1956. About three months thereafter, the present applications were filed on 7-1-1957.

The grounds for restitution of conjugal rights averred in both the cases are common. They are: that Putul Devi and Urmila Devi are legally married wives, that they resided with their respective husbands till the 3rd of Chait, 1362 fasli (corresponding to 11th March, 1955), that their father Gudri Mandal, Nokhey Mandal and Dasrath Lall came to their house and took away their wives on the pretext of serious illness of their mother that they approached their father-in-law to send back their wives several times, but failed that the aforesaid three persons were prosecuted under Sec. 498 of the Penal Code but were acquitted and that their wives, under their inducement and allurement, have refused to live with them and resume matrimonial relations.

2. The two ladies resisted the applications, substantially on the grounds of misbehaviour, assault, cruelty and immoral character of the husbands. They also pleaded that their marriages with the petitioners were performed due to misrepresentation and fraud.

3. Dasrath Lall appeared and filed a written defence denying any connection with the ladies and pleading misjoinder. It appears that subsequently Nokhey Mandal and Dasrath Lall were expunged from the record, and the cases proceeded against the wives and their father.

4. The learned Additional District Judge negatived the plea of fraud and misrepresentation in solemnisation of the marriages. He also held that the husbands were not men of loose character and the allegations of assault and cruelty were not correct. He has expressed the view that in the long stay for some years at their husbands place there might have been occasions for quarrel and misunderstanding and there might have been occasional thrashings by their husbands, but they did not amount to ill-treatment or inhuman treatment or cruelty towards the wives. He accordinly granted decree for restitution of conjugal rights. Now, the two ladies have come up in appeal.

5. In support of these appeals Mr, R. J. Bahadur raised only the question of cruelty towards the appellants. His submission is that the learned Additional District Judge took a too narrow view of cruelty and failed to take into account the humiliation and mental torture in consequence of the institution by their husbands of the criminal cases for prosecution of their father, Nokhey Mandal and Dasrath Lall under Sec. 498 of the Penal Code and that this one circumstance was sufficient to raise a reasonable apprehension in their minds that they could not thenceforth live with their husbands without harm to their health and danger to their lives.

On the other hand, Mr. K.K. Sinha, appearing for the respondents urged that legal cruelty must be of a more grievous character than the accusation implied in the institution