The court established that adultery and filing repeated false cases against a spouse amount to mental cruelty, justifying divorce.

R.S. Jha, J.

This appeal has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by judgment dated 12-8-2015 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, District Satna in H.M. Case No. 525/2014 whereby the application under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, filed by the respondent for divorce has been allowed on the ground of adultery and cruelty.

2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the appeal are that the appellant and respondent were married as per Hindu rights on 12-5-2007 at Maihar and thereafter, she went to Bhopal for pursuing her computer course and returned in December, 2007. On 1-1-2008 when the respondent was on duty at Katni the appellant ran away with one Imtiaz Khan and was discovered along with him at Dashmesh Hotel, Satna where after her maternal uncle Ashok Soni and Brijesh Soni were informed who reached the spot. Subsequently on 2-1-2008 the respondent was also informed of the fact that the appellant had run away on her own and the matter was also reported to the Police Station on 2-1-2008 and to the Superintendent of Police on 3-1-2008. On account of the incident that occurred at Dashmesh Hotel, a case was also registered against the said Imtiaz Khan at Police Station Nagod on 11-4-2008 under section 456 of Indian Penal Code. On 2-1-2008 the appellant lodged a report against the respondent under sections 498-A. 323 and 325/34 of Indian Penal Code read with section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, at Police Station, Nagod in which an enquiry was conducted by the S.D.O.P. Nagod who found that no offence had been committed and submitted a final report to the Court in that regard on 20-10-2008 and in the said report it was suggested that a case under sections 334 and 335 of Indian Penal Code, be registered against the appellant's maternal uncles, Ashok Soni and Brijesh Soni for having used force against the appellant.

3. The appellant also filed an application under section 125 of Criminal Procedure Code, claiming maintenance before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhopal which was rejected by order dated 8-4-2009 on the ground that the appellant had failed to establish that she was staying away from her husband for sufficient reasons. The appellant had also filed a case under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which was dismissed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhopal on 30-4-2010 and the appeal filed by the appellant against the dismissal of this case has also been dismissed by order dated 31-10-2013 by the Thirteenth Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations the respondent filed an application under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking divorce.

4. Initially the case for divorce filed by the respondent was allowed ex parte by order dated 23-11-2010 as the appellant failed to appear before the Court. However, the said ex parte decree of divorce was set aside in appeal and the matter was remitted back to the Court for re-adjudication after giving due opportunity of hearing to the appellant where after the impugned judgment and decree has been passed by the Court below allowing the application seeking divorce filed by the respondent. It is also brought on record by the respondent that after the application for divorce was allowed ex parte by the trial Court the respondent has entered into a second marriage with one Priyanka Soni on 29-6-2012 and has also been blessed with a daughter on 21-4-2013.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant has assailed the order on the ground that the findings recorded by the Court below regarding adultery is perverse inasmuch as the Court below has failed to take note of the fact that the respondent did not file any case before the police authorities in respect of the fact that the appellant was found at hotel Dashmesh along with Imtiaz Khan. It is submitted that had such an incident occurred, the respondent would naturally have filed a police complaint and as he has not done so, th