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

2025 Supreme(Cal) 7

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
MADHURESH PRASAD, SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA, JJ.
Dr. Bikramjit Mondal - Appellant
Versus
Smt. Anindita Mondal – Respondent
F.A.T. 211 of 2022 With IA No. CAN 2 of 2023
Decided On : 03-01-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Prasanta Kr. Pakrashi, Mr. Shyamal Sanyal, Mr. P. Das, Mr. Arup Kr. Chatterjee, Ms. Saswati Manna
For the Respondent: Mr. Srijib Chakraborty, Md. Abdur Rakib, Mr. Biswajit Sarkar.

Cruelty as a ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act requires substantial proof, which was not established in this case.

Headnote:(A) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13 - Divorce on grounds of cruelty - The Trial Court dismissed the husband's petition for divorce, finding insufficient evidence of cruelty. The husband alleged mental and physical torture by the wife, including threats and suicide attempts, but failed to substantiate these claims. The wife denied all allegations and expressed willingness to reconcile. The court emphasized that cruelty must be proven by credible evidence, which was lacking in this case. (Paras 3, 10, 13, 16)

(B) Burden of proof - The burden lies on the party alleging cruelty to provide convincing evidence. The court noted that mere allegations without corroborative evidence do not suffice to establish cruelty. (Paras 10, 13)

(C) Judicial precedents - The court referred to various judgments to clarify the definition and proof of cruelty, emphasizing that it varies based on individual circumstances and must be substantiated. (Paras 13, 15)

Facts of the case:
The husband sought divorce citing cruelty, alleging the wife inflicted mental and physical torture, while the wife denied these claims and sought to maintain the marriage.

Findings of Court:
The court found no convincing evidence of cruelty, dismissing the appeal and upholding the Trial Court's decision.

Issues: The main issue was whether the husband proved the allegations of cruelty.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the husband failed to provide credible evidence of cruelty, which is necessary to grant a divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

(Supratim Bhattacharya, J.)

1. The appellant/husband who was the petitioner before the Trial Court has preferred the present appeal after being unsuccessful before the Trial Court.

2. The petitioner/husband has prayed for divorce from his wife on the ground of cruelty.

3. The matrimonial suit has been filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Ld. Trial Court after consideration of both oral and documentary evidence has dismissed the matrimonial suit on contest without any cost.

4. The factual matrix of the present lis is that the marriage between the parties took place as per Hindu rites and customs on 03.02.2017 and thereafter on 02.03.2017 the marriage was registered. The marriage got consummated between the parties but there has been no child born from the wedlock.

5. The husband in his petition has alleged that the opposite party/wife from the initial stages has been inflicting both mental and physical torture upon him and has been pressurizing him to reside separately in a separate accommodation at her paternal house as ‘GharJamai’. The husband has denied to reside in her paternal home as ‘GharJamai’ as a consequence of which the dispute aggravated. It has also been alleged by the husband that the wife is a suspicious woman and she used to leave the matrimonial house without any information. The wife could not reside at her matrimonial house at a stretch and used to go to her paternal house frequently. It has also been alleged that the wife used to leave her matrimonial house as per her own accord without any information either to the petitioner or his family members. It has further been alleged that the wife left her matrimonial house with all her moveable stridhan articles and gold ornaments on 04.09.2019 and thereafter on 20.01.2020 she had even gone to his place of work and had forcibly entered the quarter of her husband and stayed there without the permission of her husband. It has also been alleged that on 05.04.2021 during the evening the respondent/wife threatened the petitioner and used slang languages and had even threatened to file criminal case against him, as a consequence of which on the same day at about 11.00 p.m. the petitioner had consumed sleeping pills intending to commit suicide, as a result of which he had to be admitted at the Sandeshkhali Gramin Hospital wherefrom he was referred to the Calcutta National Medical College and Hospital wherein also he was admitted and on the next day he was discharged. It has also been alleged that the husband had tried his level best to have a peaceful married life but because of his wife the marriage has not been a successful one.

6. On the contrary the respondent/wife has denied all the allegations raised by her husband. She has categorically denied the allegation of ill-behaviour by her towards her husband and her in-laws. She has also denied the use of abusive languages by her. She has further denied of leaving her matrimonial home without prior approval of her husband or her in-laws, she has also denied the fact of ill-behaviour towards her husband and in-laws and has further denied the fact of not cooking food for her husband and her in-laws and also denied the fact that she would only cook for herself.

7. Mr. Prasanta Kr. Pakrashi Ld. Counsel representing the husband being assisted by Mr. Shyamal Sanyal, Mr. P. Das, Mr. Arup Kr. Chatterjee and Ms. Saswati Manna during his exhaustive argument has stressed upon the point that

    i) Since marriage the wife being a woman of short temper used to ill-behave with her husband and her in-laws. She used to leave her matrimonial home without the consent of her husband or her in-laws. She used to cook food for herself only and not for her husband or her in-laws.

    ii) The Learned Counsel has also stated that because of unsustainable mental pressure the husband had consumed pills with the intention of committing suicide. The Ld. Counsel has emphasized that the wife through her temperament has created an env

    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