IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Sujit Narayan Prasad, Arun Kumar Rai, JJ.
Srishti Kumari, aged about 30 years, wife of Shri Shantanu Jaiswal – Appellant
Versus
Shantanu Jaiswal, son of late Ashok Prasad Jaiswal, resident of village Jalka, PO and PS: Ghagra, District - Respondent
F.A. No. 20 of 2024
Decided On : 18-12-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. case history, factual matrix, and framing of issues. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 2. parties' contentions regarding matrimonial cruelty and desertion. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
JUDGMENT :
1. The instant appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is directed against the order/judgment dated 08.01.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Lohardagain Original Suit No. 15 of 2023, whereby and where under, the Suit filed by the appellant under Sections 13 (1) (i-a) (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, has been dismissed.
Factual Matrix
2. The brief facts of the case, leading to filing of the petition filed under Section 13(1) (i-a) and (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, by the appellant/plaintiff, needs to be referred herein which are as under:
3. The plaintiff's [the appellant herein] case, in brief, is that marriage of plaintiff-appellant and defendant-respondent was solemnized on 25.06.2011 at Dewaki Mandir, Ghaghra, District-Gumla. After that they started living together as husband and wife at Ghaghra. Out of their wedlock one daughter was born. It is alleged that the defendant-respondent was addicted to liquor and playing gamble and under the influence of liquor he used to torture the plaintiff-appellant regularly. It is further alleged that the defendant-respondent has extra-marital relation with another girl. On several occasions, the defendant-respondent assaulted her with belt, shoes and abused the plaintiff-appellant without any rhyme and reason. The defendant-respondent does not want to live with the plaintiff-appellant. It is alleged that he is very offensive in nature and does not respect her as wife and always used to assault and abuse her. The plaintiff-appellant lived in her matrimonial house at Devi Mandap Road, Ranchi.
4. It is stated that the defendant-respondent on one occasion while assaulting plaintiff-appellant entered the key of scooty in her arm due to which the plaintiff-appellant received injury for which she has taken treatment in hospital. The defendant-husband used to assault the plaintiff-appellant with fists and slaps which compelled her to return to her maike on 02.12.2018 and since then she is living in her maike. The defendant- husband refused to live with plaintiff-wife. The appellant had no source of income. Therefore, she has filed a Suit under sections 13(i)(i-a)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for a decree of divorce on the ground of extra-marital relation, cruelty and desertion.
5. The learned Family Judge has issued notice upon the respondent-husband, who appeared and filed written statement admitting the factum of marriage with the plaintiff-appellant.
6. It is pleaded that the suit of plaintiff-appellant is not maintainable. She has filed the suit suppressing the material fact. The plaintiff-appellant has willfully deserted the defendant-respondent and she was never subjected to any cruelty. His marriage was solemnized with plaintiff on 25.06.2011. Since the marriage, defendant-respondent used to stay in the State of Orissa for livelihood and he used to visit his own house in Ranchi on frequent basis, but after few months, plaintiff-appellant started quarreling with her in-laws and pressurized the defendant-respondent to provide a separate rented house. Then he started living in a rented house in Ranchi.
7. Out of their wedlock one child Bhavya Jaiswal was born on 15.09.2014 when they lived in rented house. On request of defendant-respondent, the appellant agreed to return to her matrimonial house on the condition that she will not be participating in any household work and she will be residing in her maike in every weekend, to which the defendant-respondent agreed for the sake of saving relationship.
8. It is stated that the father of defendant-respondent died on 22.10.2015, after death of her father-in-law, plaintiff-appellant never stayed in her matrimonial house rather she started living on the 3rd floor of h
Arulvelu and Anr. vs.State [Represented by the Public Prosecutor] and Anr.
Dr. N.G. Dastane Vs. Mrs. S. Dastane
Shobha Rani Vs. Madhukar Reddi
V. Bhagat vs. D. Bhagat (Mrs.)
Vijay kumar Ramchandra Bhate v. Neela Vijay Kumar Bhate
Joydeep Majumdar v. Bharti Jaiswal Majumdar
Jagdish Singh v. Madhuri Devi"
Husband failed to prove cruelty or desertion in divorce suit; unproved illicit relationship allegation itself constitutes cruelty to wife; appellate court upholds trial findings absent perversity, re....
The appeal court found the Family Court's dismissal of divorce due to cruelty and desertion to be perverse, establishing that the husband's behavior justified dissolution of marriage.
The burden of proof lies with the appellant to establish claims of cruelty and desertion, which must be supported by credible evidence, and mere allegations without proof are insufficient for divorce....
For a decree of divorce under cruelty or desertion, credible evidence substantiating these claims is essential. The court found no such evidence and upheld the Family Court's decision.
Grounds for divorce under Hindu Marriage Act must be substantiated by convincing evidence; mere allegations of cruelty or adultery without proof do not warrant decree of divorce.
The court ruled that claims of cruelty and desertion must be substantiated with credible evidence, emphasizing that allegations alone are insufficient for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.