Unsubstantiated allegations amounting to character assassination of a spouse constitute mental cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

JUDGMENT

Vipin Sanghi, J. - Cm APPL. 5204/2021 & CM APPL. 5205/2021

1. Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The applications stand disposed of.

MAT.APP.(F.C.) 22/2021 & CM APPL. 5203/2021

3. The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 17.03.2021 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, South East District, Saket, New Delhi in HMA No. 731/2011, whereby the learned Principal Judge has allowed the divorce petition preferred by the respondent/husband under Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ( the Act for short). Though the petition was preferred on the grounds of both cruelty and desertion on the part of the appellant, the learned Principal Judge has allowed the petition solely on the ground of cruelty.

4. Before the learned Family Court, the two primary submissions of the respondent/husband in regard to the cruelty meted out to him were; firstly, that the appellant/wife had made a false allegation against him that he was in an illicit relationship with her own Bhabhi, i.e., her brother s wife during the period when the parties were staying at the parental home of the appellant/wife and, secondly; the appellant/wife had repeatedly threatened to commit suicide. Before the Family Court, the parties led their respective evidence and were also cross examined. The Family Court has, in its impugned judgment, discussed the evidence on both these aspects in the following manner:-

........According to the petitioner, after continuous pressure from the respondent he also lived at parental home of the respondent, but no suggestion has been given to the petitioner by the respondent that she never wanted the petitioner to live with her in her parental home. There are various allegations made by the petitioner not only in the petition but in his evidence affidavit also but he has not been cross examined on these allegations, with the result the testimony of the petitioner in this regard has gone unrebutted and unchallenged. Petitioner has further stated that he even went and lived at the parental home of the respondent on her insistance but in her parental house she alleged that he is having illicit relations with her bhabhi and also other women of the locality with the result it became very embarrassing and humiliating for him to live in the parental home of the respondent along with her. He has further stated that while living at Palwal one day respondent got entangled and quarreled with neighbours and when petitioner reached home she tried to commit suicide and started assigning the reason that petitioner does not love her and was cheating her. No suggestion has been given to the petitioner that respondent never tried to commit suicide or she did not make allegations against the character-of the petitioner. Plea of the petitioner is that being in transport business he had to load the trucks to their respective destination which usually takes place in the night due to restrictions in the entry of the commercial vehicles in the city but respondent due to this reason used to have suspicion on his character and she further alleged that he wanted to remarry. She also used to come to the work place of the petitioner and create scene and drama there. She also used to hurl abuses on the petitioner like 'kutta kamina'. Respondent has also been cross examined at length. She has denied the suggestion that petitioner has no extra marital relations with his bhabhi. She again volunteered that though she has not seen them but everybody like family members talks about it. Thus, this admission on the part of the respondent corroborates the testimony of the petitioner that respondent is in a habit of making false allegations against him and keeps on doing character assassination of the petitioner. She herself denied the suggestion that he has no extra marital relationship which means that she in his cross examination has stated that petitioner has extra marital relationship. Though she has never seen petitioner