SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Pat) 1274

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
P. B. Bajanthri, ACJ, S.B. Pd. Singh, J.
Kiran Devi, wife of Akhilesh Mishra - Appellant
Versus
Akhilesh Mishra, son of Kanhaiya Mishra and ors. - Respondents
Miscellaneous Appeal No.247 of 2019
Decided On : 01-09-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey No.5, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Ranjan Kumar Dubey, Advocate, Mr. Kumar Gaurav, Advocate, Mr. Shanshank Kashyap, Advocate, Ms. Sheshadri Kumari, Advocate

The court held that allegations of cruelty and adultery must be substantiated with credible evidence; mere allegations are insufficient for obtaining a divorce decree.

Headnote:

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 13 – Divorce – Illicit relationship and desertion by wife – Sustained unjustifiable conduct and behaviour of one spouse actually affecting physical and mental health of other spouse – Treatment complained of and resultant danger or apprehension must be very grave, substantial and weighty – Respondent-husband has failed to prove cruel behaviour of appellant towards him and his family members by strength of cogent, relevant and reliable evidence, while burden of proof of cruelty rests upon respondent-husband – Not even a single incident with reference to specific date of alleged cruelty has been urged in plaint before Family Court – Wife (appellant) is still ready to live with respondent husband – Some trifling utterance or remarks or mere threatening of one spouse to other cannot be construed as such decree of cruelty, which is legally required to a decree of divorce – Austerity of temper and behaviour, petulance of manner and harshness of language may vary from man to man born and brought up in different family background, living in different standard of life, having their quality of educational qualification and their status in society in which they live – Judgment and decree passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, set aside – Appeal allowed. (Paras 20, 22, 26 and 27)

Table of Content
1. marriage and allegations of cruelty. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
2. arguments regarding the trial court's decision. (Para 15 , 16)
3. analysis of cruelty in divorce. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
4. elements of cruelty and adultery. (Para 23 , 25)
5. conclusion on appeal outcome. (Para 27 , 28 , 29)

JUDGMENT :

S. B. PD. SINGH, J.

Heard the parties.

2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 19(1) of the Family Court Act, 1984 impugning the judgment and decree dated 25.02.2019 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Gopalganj in M.M Case No. 176 of 2011, whereby the matrimonial suit, preferred by the respondent No. 1, for a decree of divorce, on dissolution of marriage, has been allowed subject to payment of Rs. 2,50,000/- as permanent alimony for life support of the appellant.

3. The case of the respondent No. 1 as per petition filed before the Family Court is that the marriage of the appellant was solemnized with respondent No.1 in the month of May, 2005 as per the Hindu Rites and Custom. After the marriage, the appellant came to her matrimonial house and stayed there for few months and thereafter, she went to her parents’ house and stayed there for a year. The respondent-husband and his father made several attempts to take the appellant to her matrimonial house, but all the efforts went in vein. Lastly in the month of June, 2006 the respondent No. 1 went to his Sasural along with some relatives on promise of his father-in-law and brother-in-law to sent the appellant with him but she did not come with the respondent No. 1. Later on, the respondent-husband came to know that appellant has illicit relationship with Ashok Sharma (respondent No. 2) who often used to visit the house of the appellant. The respondent-husband also came to know that appellant was pregnant and a female child was born who died just after the birth. The respondent-husband made several attempts to reconcile the matter with the appellant but all his efforts went in vein. The appellant, thereafter filed Complaint Case No. 2761 of 2009 against the respondent-husband and other family members which was registered as Bhore P.S. Case No. 2 of 2010 under Sections 498(A), 406, 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE . In the aforesaid case, the respondent-husband and his father were rotting in jail for 6-7 months and ultimately after some time, on the intervention of relatives, a compromise was filed in the said case and appellant came to her Sasural but after sometime, the appellant went away from her Sasural with respondent No. 2. The respondent-husband further alleged that appellant and respondent-husband never cohabited since their marriage and appellant has completely deserted the matrimonial life of the respondent-husband. The respondent-husband, therefore, prayed that the marriage between the appellant and respondent No. 1 be declared dissolved and a decree of divorce be passed in his favour.

4. In response to the summon/notice issued by the Court, appellant/O.P No. 1 appeared and filed her reply/written statement.

5. In her written statement/reply, the respondent No. 1 has stated all the allegations levelled by the appellant against her is false, concocted and without any basis. She has further stated that after the marriage in the year 2005, she went to the house of respondent-husband and started living in her matrimonial house but after sometimes, her in- laws family members started demanding dowry and torture was inflicted for non-fulfillment of dowry demand. The appellant, in the meanwhile, conceived and a female child was born who died after birth. Thereafter, the respondent- husband and other family members started pressurizing the appellant for motorcycle and colour T.V. and ultimately, on 20-04-2009 they badly assaulted and ousted her from the matrimonial house. The father of the appellant and other relatives made several attempts and requested the respondent-husband and other in-laws to keep her at her matrimonial house but they denied to keep her at

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top