The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of mental cruelty in the context of false criminal complaints or registration of FIR against the spouse or their family members, as established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

JUDGMENT

Ashok Kumar Verma, J. - The appellant-wife has come up in appeal before this Court seeking setting aside of judgment and decree dated 29.03.2005 passed by the Additional District Judge, Sirsa, whereby petition filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the HMA') for dissolution of marriage has been allowed.

2. Brief facts of the case are that marriage between the parties was solemnized on 20.02.1992 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies by way of Anand Karaj at village Ahli Sadar, Tehsil and District Fatehabad. Marriage was duly consummated but no child was born from their wedlock. As per respondent-husband, from the very inception of the marriage appellant-wife was in the habit of raising quarrels on trivial issues and her behaviour towards him and his family members was cruel. On request of respondent to the appellant to behave properly, appellant disclosed that she was not interested in marrying the respondent rather she wanted to marry a boy of her village. In the year 1998, appellant left the matrimonial home with an excuse to pay condolence on the death of her cousin but did not return and stayed with her parents at village Ahli Sadar, Tehsil and District Fatehabad. When respondent along with respectables went to take back the appellant, she and her father levelled allegations against the respondent of being impotent. However, on being medically examined, respondent was found fit for cohabitation. Thereafter, again respondent convened a panchayat wherein appellant agreed to stay with him but after a short stay, appellant threatened the respondent and his family members to implicate in false case of demand of dowry. Respondent also filed a petition under Section 9 of the HMA for restitution of conjugal rights wherein appellant agreed to reside with him but left the matrimonial home without any rhyme and reason. Thereafter, respondent filed petition under Section 13 of the HMA for dissolution of marriage but with the intervention of the respectables same was dismissed as withdrawn. Respondent again filed petition under Section 9 of the HMA. However, appellant refused to join the matrimonial home and she lodged FIR No.267 dated 14.09.1999 under Sections 498-A/406/34 IPC at Police Station Sadar, Fatehabad against the respondent and his family members. Thus, respondent again filed petition under Section 13 of the HMA for dissolution of marriage with the appellant.

3. On notice, appellant-wife filed written statement to the petition alleging that respondent and his family members treated her with cruelty. They were demanding more and more dowry. After the compromise in the Court, appellant returned to the matrimonial home on 19.05.1999 and started residing with the respondent but on 21.07.1999 respondent left her at the bus stand of village Dariyapur, District Fatehabad, and demanded a scooter and Rs. 50,000/- in cash for allowing her to live with him. Appellant denied all the allegations levelled by the respondent and prayed for dismissal of the petition.

4. Respondent-husband filed replication controverting the allegations of the written statement and reiterating his stand in the petition.

5. On the pleadings of the parties, following issues were framed:

"1. Whether the respondent treated the petitioner with cruelty and if so, to what effect? OPP

2. Whether the respondent deserted the petitioner without any reasonable case and if so to what effect? OPP

3. Relief."

6. Both the parties led evidence in support of their respective contentions.

7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the evidence on record, petition filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13 of the HMA was allowed and decree of divorce was passed in his favour.

8. The marriage between the parties was solemnised in February, 1992 but no child was born from the said wedlock.

9. Perusal of record shows that respondent and his parents were convicted by the trial Court, Fatehabad unde