Court upheld divorce on cruelty/desertion/non-consummation; awarded Rs.35 lakhs permanent alimony under S.25 HMA factoring wife's dependency, husband's family business/assets, remarriage, inflation, life expectancy for reasonable sustenance.

Judgment :

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

1. The instant appeal, under Section 19(1) of the Family Court Act, 1984, is directed against the order/judgment dated 04.06.2024 and decree signed on 21.06.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hazaribagh in Original Suit No. 166 of 2022, whereby and whereunder, the suit filed by the petitioner-respondent [husband] for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce u/s 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 against petitioner-appellant [wife], has been allowed.

2. The brief facts of the case, leading to filing of the divorce petition by the respondent-petitioner, as taken note in the impugned order, needs to be referred herein, which reads as under:

The marriage of the petitioner and the respondent solemnized on 04.02.2019 at Shiv Mandir Jhumra, Hazaribag according to Hindu rites and customs in the presence of family members, well-wishers and respectable persons of both the parties. After the marriage, the respondent- appellant came to her matrimonial house, but their marriage has not been consummated because the respondent-appellant has not permitted the respondent-petitioner to establish physical relationship with her. The marriage of respondent-petitioner with the respondent-appellant was solemnized under pressure, threat and coercion. It has further been averred that the mother of respondent-appellant, namely, Anju Devi had lodged a false case against the petitioner-respondent and one Sabur Mahto vide Special POCSO Case no. 10/2020, T.R. no. 55/2020 arising out of Barkagaon P.S. Case no. 168/18 for sexual exploitation of one minor girl i.e. the respondent-appellant u/s 376 (2), 366 of the I.P.C. read with section 6 of POCSO Act which was tried by the Ld. Sessions Judge-1 Hazaribag and after trial vide judgment dated 27.02.2020 both respondent- petitioner and Sabur Mahto were acquitted as the prosecution has failed to prove its case. But due to pressure of family members of respondent- petitioner and other persons of the society, respondent-petitioner married with the appellant-respondent and the married life of respondent-petitioner with the appellant-respondent is a long story of grief and sorrow.

It has been stated in the impugned judgment that on the very first night, the appellant-respondent declared that she had love affair with one Muslim boy and she has already married with him in the presence of her parents and relatives, so she has no lust for the respondent-petitioner and further she will not allow the respondent-petitioner to establish physical relationship with the respondent-petitioner, but even after all these, the respondent-petitioner treated the appellant-respondent with affection. It has been further submitted that while living in her sasural, appellant-respondent always engaged in talking with someone else which was objected by the respondent-petitioner but she was not ready to listen to anything. The respondent-petitioner complained to his father-in-law and requested to make the appellant-respondent understan