HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Sanjay K. Agrawal, Arvind Kumar Verma, JJ.
Dinesh Sahu, S/o Shri Radheshyam Sahu - Appellant
versus
Smt. Padma Sahu, W/o Shri Dinesh Sahu - Respondent
FA(MAT) No. 59 of 2023
Decided On : 03-03-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arguments from both parties regarding the dissolution. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. mental cruelty demonstrated by the respondent's actions. (Para 6 , 32) |
| 3. definition and elements of desertion as a ground for divorce. (Para 22 , 34) |
| 4. conclusion granting divorce and outlining further proceedings. (Para 41 , 42 , 43) |
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay K. Agrawal, J.
1. Invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, the appellant herein/plaintiff has preferred this appeal challenging the judgment & decree dated 18-1-2023 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Balodabazar in HMA No.105A/2022, by which his application for dissolution of marriage on the grounds contained in Sections 13(1)(ia) & 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, ‘the Act of 1955’), has been rejected finding no merit.
2. The aforesaid challenge has been made on the following factual backdrop: -
(For the sake of convenience, parties hereinafter will be referred as per their status shown and ranking given in the civil suit before the Family Court.)
2.1) The appellant herein/plaintiff filed application for dissolution of marriage with the respondent herein/defendant stating inter alia that their marriage was solemnized on 15-2-2015 at Village Raikona, Police Station Sarsiwa, under Hindu rites and customs and immediately after marriage, his wife i.e. the respondent herein resided with him for 10-11 days and thereafter proceeded to her maternal home, thus she lived with him only for 10-11 days and thereafter, started pressurizing him to live separately from his ailing and aged parents and in case of refusal, she threatened him to implicate him in false case and from July, 2017, she started residing separately without there being any reason. Thereafter, in the year 2018, the defendant/wife got registered FIR against the plaintiff/ husband and his family members for offence punishable under Sections 498A read with Section 34 of the IPC & 5 of the Chhattisgarh Tonhi Pratadna Nivaran Adhiniyam, 2005, which was pending consideration before the jurisdictional criminal court and which comes under the purview of mental cruelty. It has further been pleaded that counselling was done by the Family Welfare Committee, Balodabazar on 23-7-2018 in which his wife i.e. the respondent herein has categorically and unequivocally stated that she is not willing to reside in her matrimonial home by leaving her father and mother. It has also been pleaded that the defendant/wife is residing separately from the plaintiff/husband since more than 5-6 years which falls under the definition of cruelty under Section 13(1) (ia) of the Act of 1955 and living separately since more than 5-6 years which leads to the ground of desertion under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Act of 1955. In para 12 of the plaint, it has also been clearly stated that false case has been filed by the respondent/wife against the plaintiff/ husband and his family members for offence punishable under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the IPC at Police Station Sarsiwa, which constitutes the ground of mental cruelty. Thus, the plaintiff/husband prayed for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce.
2.2) The defendant/wife filed written statement controverting the allegations made in the plaint stating inter alia that the plaintiff started demanding dowry, four-wheeler, etc. and used to draw amount of her salary by ATM card and also used to brand her ‘tonhi’ and did not take her along with him. In paragraph 5, she has admitted the fact that case of dowry under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the IPC and tonhi pratadna for offence under Sections 4 & 5 of the Chhattisgarh Tonhi Pratadna Nivaran Adhiniyam, 2005 were registered against the appellant herein and his family members and pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhatgaon, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara. As such, the plaintiff/husband is not entitled for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce.
2.3) The Family



Rani Narasimha Sastry v. Rani Suneela Rani
Sanjay Kumar Singh v. State of Jharkhand
Malluru Mallappa (Dead) Through Legal Representatives v. Kuruvathappa and others
Haryana Suraj Malting Limited v. Phool Chand
Rabindra Singh v. Financial Commissioner, Cooperation, Punjab and others
Dr. N.G. Dastane v. Mrs. S. Dastane
False allegations and criminal proceedings against a spouse can constitute mental cruelty, affirming grounds for divorce under Hindu Marriage Act.
The court established that wrongful criminal allegations can constitute mental cruelty justifying a divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Husband failed to prove cruelty or desertion in divorce suit; unproved illicit relationship allegation itself constitutes cruelty to wife; appellate court upholds trial findings absent perversity, re....
False accusations and long-term separation can constitute mental cruelty, justifying divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act.
For a decree of divorce under cruelty or desertion, credible evidence substantiating these claims is essential. The court found no such evidence and upheld the Family Court's decision.
The institution of a false criminal complaint by a spouse can amount to mental cruelty upon the other spouse, and can be a ground for divorce under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Prolonged separation and absence of cohabitation constitute mental cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, justifying divorce.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.