The main legal point established in the judgment is that to prove mental cruelty in a divorce case, the acts of cruelty must be sustained, abusive, and humiliating, and the burden of proof lies with the party making the allegations.

1. This is a wife’s appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, directed against a judgment and order decreeing dissolution of her marriage with the respondent (hereafter called “the husband”). This Court had the benefit of considering the Trial court records.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the parties to the proceedings got married on 01.09.2008. It was a second marriage for both of them; the wife had a son-a minor child at the time of the second marriage (named Gautam) and the husband had two daughters, both living with their mother (his divorced first wife). The husband filed for divorce claiming that the wife had treated him with cruelty. He cited several grounds, such as the wife’s persistent demands to adopt the wife’s son; her alleged designs on his property and various other acts of mental cruelty. The most serious charge– and ground– of mental cruelty was the wife’s acts of cruelty, including alleged physical violence, in the form of beating up of the husband’s 93 year old mother, who lived with the couple.

3. The husband alleged in the pleadings and during the course of his evidence that initially the wife behaved properly but later started pressurizing him to adopt Gautam, her child. To save the marriage he agreed to take the child to the matrimonial home but refused to adopt him and assured that he would adopt him only when everything turned to be fine. The husband stated that he has taken care of the child and that he even borne his educational and other expenses. The child, however, did not behave properly with him and never acted sensibly and even addressed him as ‘pagal’. He further alleged that wife and her family members pressurized him to get separated from his mother. He stated that the wife had threatened to implicate him in a false case of dowry if he did not purchase a new house in her name and as well as that of her child. Though, the husband tried to make her realize his financial constraints, she was unwilling to listen and tortured him mentally as well as physically. The husband stated that the family members of both spouses met on several occasions to resolve the issues and the wife who had gone to her parental house was brought back with the assurance that she would behave properly and discharge her matrimonial responsibilities. There was, however, no change in the circumstances. It was alleged that the husband was once beaten by wife’s brother-in-law Yashpal who also extended threats of dire consequences. The husband further alleged that wife had tried to commit suicide and despite his effort to make her understand the importance of matrimonial obligations, she did not change. She even alleged that he and his family members would be implicated in false criminal cases. She fought with him on small and trivial issues such as household expenses, child fees etc. She never cooked food and he had to order meals from outside. The wife, it was alleged, made excuses such as chest pain and avoided doing household work. The husband got her examined but her reports turned out to alright.

4. The husband claimed that on 22.07.2010 whilst he was going to the shop in the morning, the wife called him over telephone threatening to commit suicide. Upon his rushing back, he found nothing of that sort had happened. The wife threatened that she would not let him live peacefully till her demands were met. It was then that the husband lodged complaint with the SHO, Shalimar Bagh regarding the incident. That evening when he returned from the shop he was not allowed to enter the house. In these set of circumstances, the following day i.e. on 23.07.2010 the wife left the matrimonial house and in the course of the day the husband came to know that she had left along with her child and had also taken all her jewellery, cash and other articles kept at home. The husband tried to contact the wife but she refused to talk to him and instead threatened him of dire consequences. Despite his best effor