IMPORTANT POINT
Concealment of a significant medical condition prior to marriage and subsequent abusive behavior can constitute grounds for divorce on the basis of cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act.

JUDGMENT :

BIREN VAISHNAV, J.

1. First Appeal No. 1445 of 2024 was filed by the appellant wife who was respondent in Family Suit No. 231 of 2013. Family Suit No. 231 of 2014 was filed by the respondent-husband praying for a dissolution of marriage by passing a decree of divorce under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act. By a judgment and order dated 05.03.2024, the Family Court at Rajkot allowed the respondent’s family suit and declared that the marriage stands dissolved on the ground of cruelty.

2. First Appeal No. 1759 of 2024 is filed by the appellant wife. Family Suit No. 288 of 2012 filed by the wife under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights was dismissed.

3. Learned counsels for the respective parties have, for the purposes of this judgment, argued First Appeal No. 1445 of 2024.

4. Brief facts of the case are as under:

4.1 The parties to this appeal had entered into wedlock on 12.03.2012. The case of the husband before the Family Court praying for divorce was that it was the second marriage of the appellant herein. Both parties had come into contact with each-other through internet. Initially there were reservations from the husband’s family on the marriage, however, the respondent-husband convince the families to get married.

4.2 The respondent filed petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act stating that both the husband and wife were doctors. The husband was working at Bhavnagar and on he passing the GPSC examination, had shifted to Rajkot. The case of the husband before the Family Court in Section 13 application was that the respondent during the course of discussions to enter into marriage did not disclose the fact that the wife was suffering from Thalassemia. It was the case of the respondent husband that the wife continued to humiliate the parents of the husband-respondent herein. At one such instance, when the wife quarreled with the husband on 29.07.2012, the wife’s father had to be called to Bhavnagar. She threatened that she would hang herself by tying a Dupatta in her neck. It was therefore the case of the husband/defendant in FA No. 1445 of 2024 that it was not possible to stay with the wife. He too, suffers from “Thalassemia Minor” whereas the wife did not disclose this fact. Pending the petition for divorce filed by the husband and pending an application for restitution filed by the wife, by way of an interim arrangement, the parties stayed together and went to Srinagar. It was during their stay there that the wife conceive and therefore a daughter was born. It is the case of the appellant that she was compelled to do abortion as the family wanted a son. On the other hand, the version of the husband before the Family Court was that as per the medical advise, the doctors had suggested that since the wife was Thalassemia Minor, she should terminate her pregnancy, to which, she did not agree. Compounded with this fact, his father-in-law through an MLA has made complaints to the employer of the husband against the character of the husband and therefore recommended that disciplinary action be taken. This therefore, in the perception of the husband, tantamount to cruelty. The Trial Court in the Family Suit filed for divorce by the husband, observed that there was concealment of ailment of Thalassemia Minor by the wife. Due to an adamant behavior of hers, she refused to undergo test when she conceived. There were medical complications as a result of which the doctors suggested her not to proceed with the pregnancy. From the evidence on record, the Trial Court found that because of the concealment of her ailment there was derailment of marriage. The story of the wife that she was compelled to abort as the family wanted a boy and not a girl child was not believed by the Family Court. The story of the wife that she was administered an abortion pill was also not accepted. Further, the Family Court observed that based on the complaint made by the wife for getting ‘Stri Dhan’ an