Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
GOUTAM BHADURI, DEEPAK KUMAR TIWARI, JJ.
Dheerendra Kumar Dwivedi, S/o. L.P. Dwivedi - Appellant
Versus
Smt. Manju Dwivedi, W/o. Dheerendra Kumar - Respondent
FA (MAT) No. 119 Of 2022
Decided On : 01-11-2023
Divorce - Cruelty and Desertion - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 9, 125 Cr.P.C., Domestic Violence Act, Section 498-A IPC - Raj Talreja v Kavita Talreja : (2017) 14 SCC 194, Rani Narasimha Sastry v Rani Suneela Rani : (2020) 18 SCC 247
Fact of the Case:
The husband sought a divorce on grounds of cruelty and desertion, alleging that the wife refused to live with his parents, made false allegations, and filed multiple complaints and cases against him and his family. The wife denied the allegations and stated that the husband and his parents harassed her for dowry.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the wife's conduct amounted to mental cruelty, as she continuously refused to reconcile, made false accusations, and filed multiple complaints and cases against the husband and his family. The court held that the husband was entitled to a decree of divorce.
Issues: The main issues were whether the wife's conduct amounted to cruelty and desertion, and whether the husband was entitled to a divorce.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the wife's continuous refusal to reconcile, false accusations, and filing of multiple complaints and cases amounted to mental cruelty, justifying the grant of a divorce to the husband.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the marriage between the parties was dissolved by a decree of divorce, setting aside the judgment and decree of the Family Court.
Based on the provided legal document, the key points are as follows:
The marriage was solemnized on 24-2-2011, and the wife delivered a baby girl on 14-12-2011. The wife has been living separately since 14-11-2011, which is a significant period of separation (!) (!) .
The husband sought a divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion, alleging that the wife created pressure to live separately, made false accusations, and filed multiple complaints and cases against him and his family. The wife denied these allegations and claimed harassment for dowry (!) (!) .
The wife filed various complaints under different legal provisions, including domestic violence and criminal cases under Section 498-A IPC, which were ultimately dismissed or resulted in acquittals. Despite this, the litigation and allegations continued for several years (!) (!) .
The court observed that the wife made reckless, defamatory, and false accusations against her husband and his family, which caused mental cruelty. The conduct of filing false complaints and accusations, especially after criminal trials resulted in acquittals, was deemed to amount to mental cruelty (!) (!) .
The court emphasized that cruelty in matrimonial cases is a broad and fact-specific concept, including conduct that causes deep mental anguish. In this case, the persistent false accusations and litigation by the wife were found to constitute mental cruelty justifying the grant of a decree of divorce (!) (!) .
The court noted that the wife’s conduct, including her refusal to reconcile, her filing of false complaints, and her continued litigation, demonstrated a pattern of mental cruelty. This conduct justified the husband's entitlement to a divorce (!) (!) .
The appellate court found that the Family Court's earlier decision dismissing the husband's divorce petition was not justified, given the evidence of ongoing false allegations and mental cruelty. Therefore, the appellate court set aside the Family Court's judgment and decreed the divorce, dissolving the marriage (!) (!) .
The court clarified that mere lodging of complaints or FIRs is not necessarily cruelty, but false allegations and the manner in which they are made can amount to cruelty, especially when they are proven to be false and have caused significant mental distress (!) (!) .
The decision underscores that ongoing litigation, false accusations, and conduct that causes mental anguish over a prolonged period can justify divorce under the grounds of cruelty and desertion (!) (!) .
The appeal was allowed, the marriage was dissolved, and each party was ordered to bear their own costs (!) (!) .
These points collectively reflect the court's reasoning that persistent false accusations, false complaints, and the resulting mental cruelty justify the grant of a divorce in this case.
JUDGMENT :
(Deepak Kumar Tiwari, J.) :
1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment & decree dated 15-6-2022 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Korba, in civil suit No.142-A/2019 whereby the application preferred by the appellant/husband for grant of decree of divorce was dismissed. The husband is in appeal before this Court.
2. (i) The facts of the case, in brief, are that the parties were married on 24-2-2011. It has been alleged by the husband that on the next day of marriage his parents and his younger brother went to Raipur. At that time his father was posted at Raipur. They stayed at Raipur till 30-10-2011 and thereafter, they came back to Korba on 1-11-2011. The husband further contended that after the marriage the wife is not cooperating in the household works and creating pressure to live separately. She always used to humiliate the husband and asked him to send his sexagenarian parents to the old age home. The wife is also not willing to stay at paternal village Baismuda, District Janjgir. After retirement when his parents are residing with him, the wife became annoyed and used to quarrel and without any rhyme or reason she always used to go to her maternal house, which is also situated at Korba.
(ii) On 14-11-2011 the wife has called her father and returned to her parental house along with her clothes and jewellery. On 14-12-2011 one baby girl was born and when the husband had gone to bring back the wife at that time the wife again created pressure to live separately and to keep her at Government quarter and also made a demand that he will not allow to keep his parents in that house. Though the husband has tried his level best to convince his wife, but she has not agreed for the same and started doing the Government job at Bilaspur since February, 2014. She used to threaten the husband to implicate him and his family members in false case of dowry and domestic violence.
(iii) Husband has also made a complaint about such threatening to the Superintendent of Police, Korba on various dates i.e. 19-3-2012, 23-4-2012, 30-5-2013. During counselling held on 21-4-2012 at Mahila Councelling Centre, Korba, the wife has acceded her mistake. Subsequently, she had filed maintenance application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. before the Family Court, Bilaspur on 17-7-2012 and during the counselling she refused to join the company of the husband. On the basis of compromise, maintenance to the tune of Rs. 3,000/- per month was awarded by order dated 20-2-2013 and the same was enhanced to Rs. 4,000/- per month by order dated 1-8-2018 passed by the High Court. In the maintenance proceedings the wife has supressed the material fact that she was doing the Government job. The husband has earlier filed an application under Section 9 of the restitution of conjugal rights.
(iv) After appearance of the wife, it appears that there are chances of reconciliation, therefore, he filed an application for withdrawal of the said application and subsequently, withdrew the same on 22-2-2013. The wife has made a complaint against the husband and his parents before the Chhattisgarh State Women Commission, Raipur, on 27-4-2012 on the basis of false allegations. During the counselling proceedings, which were held on 6-12-2012 & 15-2-2023, she remained absent and hence the Commission has filed such complaint on 15-2-2023. Thereafter, the wife has again filed a compliant case under the Domestic Violence Act on 18-3-2013, which was also culminated in further dismissal vide order dated 12-9-2019 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class. The wife has also filed a police complaint on 21-7-2013 for cruelty on the basis of bringing less dowry and she also complained that the husband used to make allegation on her about witchcraft. In such case, during the bail proceedings the wife has objection (Ex.P/21) to protest the bail application. Parents of the husband were sent to jail for about 3 days from 27-7-2013 to 29-7-2013 and the said proceedings were also resu
Continuous refusal to reconcile, false accusations, and filing of multiple complaints and cases by one spouse against the other can amount to mental cruelty, justifying the grant of a divorce.
False allegations and harassment by a spouse can result in mental cruelty, justifying divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The court held that prolonged separation and actions causing mental anguish, including false accusations, constitute sufficient grounds for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The main legal point established is that prolonged separation, false accusations, and reluctance for sexual relations can constitute cruelty under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Persistent pressure from a spouse to separate from family constitutes mental cruelty justifying divorce.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
