The marriage was validly solemnized under the Special Marriage Act, and prolonged separation along with subsequent events renders the continuation of marital obligations impossible, invoking the doctrine of frustration to justify divorce.

ORAL JUDGMENT :

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA)

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The present appeal taken on our board, which preferred against the impugned judgment dated 28.02.2018 as passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Begusarai in Divorce Case No. 69 of 2013, whereunder the petition as brought by the applicant/respondent, Nita Bharti, who is the wife of O.P./appellant namely, Manoj Kumar @ Munna filed under section 27 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, was dismissed considering that marriage between the parties was “void ab initio”, therefore, the question of divorce does not arise. Being aggrieved with aforesaid judgment, present appeal was preferred by opposite party/appellant, who is the husband of the respondent.

3. The factual aspect of the case of applicant/respondent namely, Nita Bharti suggest that her marriage was solemnized with OP/appellant namely, Manoj Kumar @ Munna as per provisions available under Special Marriage Act before Special Marriage Officer, Teghra, Begusarai, on 04.10.2007. She joined her matrimonial home with OP/appellant and lived there for 4-5 days, whereafter she was assaulted and abused calling her caste name publicly as she was the member of scheduled caste community by the OP/appellant and his family members, who had further raised a demand of Rs. Five Lakhs in cash and one Katha of land at Begusarai, due to non-fulfillment of which, she was drove from her matrimonial home.

4. It also transpires that marriage was a love marriage without any intimation to parents of the parties and subsequently the applicant/respondent qualified the medical entrance examination and joined her MBBS course in Mahatma Gandhi Medical Science College, Vardha in the year 2013.

During aforesaid period, the OP/appellant visited to her on several occasions and also tortured her during said visit. On one of such occasion i.e. on 20.02.2013, the appellant made an attempt to commit murder of applicant/respondent, Nita Bharti by strangulating her, upon refusal of demand of Rs. 25,000/-. The information qua aforesaid occurrence had given to police, who did not take any action in view of the relationship of applicant/respondent with OP/appellant. On 25.02.2013, the applicant/respondent came to her parental place Baghi, Begusarai, and narrated the entire facts to her parents, who called a panchayat on 18.03.2013 at their place, wherein the OP/appellant namely, Manoj Kumar @ Munna with his parents were present and again raised their demand qua dowry and humiliated the applicant/respondent on caste line, whereafter a criminal complaint case No. 530C/2013 was lodged. OP/appellant namely, Manoj Kumar @ Munna is from different caste (not a member of scheduled caste community) and he, therefore, alleged to humiliate the applicant/respondent publicly in her caste name being the member of scheduled caste community.

5. Citing all such reasons, the divorce petition was preferred by applicant/respondent, Nita Bharti for dissolution of her marriage with Manoj Kumar @ Munna (OP/appellant) with a demand of Rs. Five Lakhs as permanent alimony. Considering the pleading of the parties, the learned Family Court,