JUDGMENT :

Sudhir Singh, J.

Challenge in the present appeal is to the judgment and decree dated 18.09.2024 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Camp Court Patti (for short 'the Family Court'), whereby, the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') filed by the respondent-husband was allowed, and the marriage between the parties was dissolved by a decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion.

2. The aforesaid petition had been filed, inter alia, pleading therein that his marriage with the appellant-wife was solemnized on 06.03.2010 according to Sikh rites, and out of the said wedlock, two children were born. It was further alleged that from the very inception of the marriage, behaviour and attitude of the appellant-wife was cruel towards the respondent-husband and his family members. She and her family members had pressurized the respondent husband to live separately from his parents and when the respondent-husband had expressed his inability, she threatened him to commit suicide and implicate him and his family members in a false case. She left matrimonial house 2-3 times without permission of the respondent-husband, but she was brought back. However, after sometime, she started repeating the same behaviour. She was a mental patient and she was taking the treatment from Dr. Vidya Sagar, Institute of Mental Health, Amritsar and the Department of Psychiatry Guru Nanak Dev Hospital Government Medical College, Amritsar. In January 2019, she left the matrimonial house without the consent of the respondent-husband. The respondent-husband along with respectable persons visited her parental house in order to bring her back, but her family members refused to send her back. She had withdrawn from the society of the respondent-husband since January 2019, and marriage between the parties had irretrievably broken and there was no chance for reconciliation.

3. Upon notice, the appellant-wife entered appearance and filed her written statement admitting the factum of marriage and birth of the children. However, it was alleged by her that dowry articles given in the shape of istridhan had been misappropriated by the respondent-husband and his family members and she reserved her right to file a criminal complaint under Sections 406 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'the IPC') against them. The respondent-husband and his family members were not satisfied with the dowry given and they had harassed and humiliated her for bringing insufficient dowry. When she had been turned out of the matrimonial house, she moved an application to SSP, Tarn Taran and during enquiry, the respondent-husband suffered a statement that he did not want to keep the appellant-wife in the matrimonial home though she was ready and willing to stay there. The allegations regarding cruelty and desertion were denied.

4. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the learned Family Court:-

'1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion? OPP

2. Whether the petition is not maintainable? OPR

3. Relief.'

5. In evidence, the respondent-husband appeared as PW1 besides examining PW2-Jermal Singh, PW3-ASI Gurdeep Singh. On the other hand, the appellant-wife stepped into the witness box as RW1 and had also examined RW2-Balwinder Singh.

6. Learned Family Court, after considering rival contentions of the parties and evidence on record, allowed the petition filed by the respondent-husband, as noticed above.

7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant-wife has vehemently argued that findings recorded by the learned Family Court are based on conjectures and surmises. It is further argued that the respondent-husband had admitted in his testimony that the appellant-wife had not done any act of mental disturbance. It is further argued that factum of mental illness, as alleged by the respondent-husband, was not proved on record.