Back
2025 Supreme(Jhk) 1656
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, ARUN KUMAR RAI, JJ.
Rohit Raj Kumar Singh @ Sanjay Singh Son Of Late Raj Nandan Singh @ Rajnarayan Singh - Appellant
Versus
Dipty Singh, wife of Sh. Rohit Raj Kumar Singh - Respondent
F.A. No. 14 of 2025
Decided on : 08-09-2025
Advocate Appeared :
For the Appellant :Mr. Subhneet Jha, Advocate
For the Respondent : Ms. Aprajita Mishra, Advocate
For the Appellant :Mr. Subhneet Jha, Advocate
For the Respondent:Ms. Aprajita Mishra, Advocate
The court affirmed that evidence of continued mental cruelty and desertion justifies the dissolution of marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act.
Headnote:(A) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Sections 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) - Family Courts Act, 1984 - Judgment for dissolution of marriage granted based on evidence of cruelty and desertion - Decree signed on 17.12.2024. (Paras 1, 4, 40)
(B) Cruelty and Desertion - Court finds respondent subjected petitioner to grave mental cruelty with abusive behavior, illicit relationships, and ousting from matrimonial home; hence, grounds for divorce established. (Paras 38, 40)
Facts of the case:
Parties married on 01.03.2012 and had a son. Respondent accused appellant of mental cruelty—abusive, alcoholic, and forcing to take loans—leading to her ousting on 12.12.2018. (Paras 2, 4)
Findings of Court:
Evidence from both sides considered, with the Family Court holding that grounds of cruelty and desertion are proved; decree of divorce granted. (Paras 40, 41)
Issues: Maintainability of suit, valid cause of action, proven cruelty, desertion, and entitlement to relief assessed. (Para 3)
Ratio Decidendi: The evidence established that the respondent experienced continual mental torture and abandonment, satisfying the legal definitions of cruelty and desertion, warranting the decree. (Paras 26, 40)
Result: Appeal dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of marriage and allegations of cruelty. (Para 1 , 2 , 4) |
| 2. arguments by the appellant challenging the judgment. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. arguments by the respondent supporting the judgment. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. court’s evaluation of cruelty and desertion. (Para 15 , 16 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 24 , 26 , 29 , 30 , 33 , 36) |
| 5. definition of cruelty and desertion as grounds for divorce. (Para 23 , 28 , 31) |
| 6. final decision on appeal. (Para 41 , 42 , 43) |
ORDER :
1. The instant appeal has been filed on behalf of the respondent/appellant under Section 19(1) of the FAMILY COURTS ACT , 1984 against the order/judgment dated 12.12.2024 [decree signed on 17.12.2024] passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro in Original Suit No. 512 of 2021, whereby and whereunder, the said Suit filed by the respondent-wife under sections 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955 for dissolution of her marriage has been allowed.
2. The brief facts of the case are referred herein as under:
The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 01.03.2012 as per Hindu rites and rituals. Following the marriage, the parties established their matrimonial residence in Bokaro where the marriage was duly consummated resulting in the birth of their son, namely, Aditya Singh on 27.4.2013. By the time the respondent-wife found that the appellant-husband is extremely rude, abusive, unpredictable, ill-mannered and alcoholic and he had also illicit relationship with some other girls. He has no regard for family values and was engaged in illegal activities having nexus with local criminals. The appellant-husband used filthy languages against her and her family members and also used to assault her for more dowry. He forced her to take loan and borrow huge sums of money from her father and when she expressed inability of her father, the appellant along with his family members ousted her from the house on 12.12.2018 along with their four years old son and since then the respondent-wife is living in her father’s house along with her four years son. It is further alleged that the appellant- husband and his brother had taken loan of Rs. 1 crore 10 lakhs from Bank of India, Chas Branch, Bokaro in which the respondent-wife forced to sign as a guarantor. She being an uneducated lady, being hardly 10th pass in Hindi Medium and not conversant with English language or documents did not understand the contents and signed on the same. The said loan account was declared as NPA on 31.5.2018 leading to filing of a first information report against all parties being Chas PS Case No. 131 of 2018. As being a guarantor in the said loan account, she was arrested and spent more than ten months in custody whereas the appellant was absconding and lastly, he was arrested on 8.2.2021 and, therefore, Original Suit No. 512 of 2021 has been filed by the respondent-wife for decree of divorce.
3. Notice was issued to the appellant who appeared and filed his written statement. Thereafter, altogether five issues have been framed by the learned Family Judge which are as follows:
(i) Is this suit maintainable in its present form?
(ii) Whether the petitioner has valid cause of action for the suit?
(iii) Whether the respondent (husband) has subjected the petitioner (wife to cruelty after marriage?
(iv) Whether the respondent (husband) deserted his wife (petitioner) since last two years prior to filing of the suit and is entitled to get a Decree of dissolution of marriage on the basis of Sections 13(1)(ia)(ib) of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955?
(v) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
4. The evidences have been made on behalf of both the parties. Thereafter, the judgment dated 12.12.2024 has been passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro allowing the Suit by holding that the marriage solemnized on 01.03.2012 between the petitioner, namely, Dipty Singh (respondent herein) and the respondent, namely, Rohit Raj Kumar Sin
