Reckless allegations and unfounded accusations in matrimonial proceedings are considered cruelty and can justify the dissolution of marriage under family law.

JUDGMENT :

ARINDAM SINHA, J.

1. Appellant before us is aggrieved by judgment dated 11^th January, 2022 of the Family Court. At instance of respondent, the marriage was dissolved. Appellant’s case is that she is willing to be with respondent upon interference in appeal, to reverse the judgment. Mr. Moharana, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellant and Mr. Das, learned senior advocate, for respondent.

2. The appeal was heard on earlier occasions. It transpires that appellant has only to show us that the Family Court erred in concluding cruelty was proved, as a ground for dissolution of the marriage. This is because on behalf of respondent, finding on desertion as a ground has not been supported in defence to the appeal.

3. Mr. Moharana had earlier submitted, ground of cruelty was not proved. There were allegations made of his client having ill- treated her mother-in-law and shouted in loud voice but neither the mother-in-law nor any neighbor was examined to prove the allegation. Mr. Das had earlier submitted, pursuant to his client filing for divorce, appellant filed false complaint before the police resulting in his client being taken into custody for 11 days. The fact was brought on record by way of amendment to the petition. Additional written statement was filed by respondent. We ascertained that the pleadings were completed prior to framing of issues.

4. Pursuant to observations made by us, as recorded in order- sheet, the charge-sheet was produced and it appears therefrom, sections 377 and 494 in Indian Penal Code, 1860, as were noted in the FIR, were not included in it. Thus it is revealed that allegations made in the complaint, of unnatural sex and bigamy were allegations that did not yield any substance, upon investigation made by the police, for being included in the charge-sheet. It is in this context, on behalf of respondent submission was made by relying upon judgments of the Supreme Court as well as view taken by co-ordinate Bench that, reckless allegations made in the proceeding also amounts to cruelty. The judgments are Vijaykumar Ramchandra Bhate v. Neela Vijaykumar Bhate , reported in (2003) 6 SCC 334 , paragraphs 6,7 and 8, K. Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa , reported in AIR (2013) 2176 paragraphs 12,14 and 27 and view taken by co-ordinate Bench in (Sri) Ganesh Prasad Khatua v. Smt. Laxmirani Khatua, reported in 136 (2023) CLT 232 , paragraph 32. We see that the Division Bench in said paragraph 32 had relied upon Vijaykumar Ramchandra Bhate (supra). The view taken was, inter alia, in subsequent paragraph 34, reproduced below.

“34. We have taken note of the conduct of the respondent that she has made the grave allegation of extra-marital relation, not in the written statement nor in the additional written statement. Such allegations have been abruptly made in her examination-in-chief and those allegations occupied further magnitude in the cross-examination. We have no hesitation to hold that those allegations come within the meaning of cruelty as those are bound to hurt the appellant enormously.”

5. Today, Mr. Moharana relies on view taken by a Division Bench in the High Court of Delhi. The case was MAT APP (FC) 38 of 2023 and applications made therein dealt with on judgment dated 8^th August, 2023 (Kamlesh Sharma v. Yogender Kumar Sharma) He relies on paragraph 21 to 27, 47 and 51. Paragraphs 21 to 27 are reproduced below.

“21. It is thus contended that even unproven allegations of the nature in question were sufficient to constitute mental cruelty and, therefore, there is no error in the impugned judgment.

22. Before adverting to