SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(MP) 486

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR
ANAND PATHAK, HIRDESH, JJ.
Prabal Kumar Dixit - Appellant
Versus 
Smt. Rimpal Dixit – Respondent 
First Appeal No. 253 of 2017
Decided On : 16-01-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Shri Rajnish Sharma and Shri Vinod Pathak.
For the Respondent: Shri Vijay Sundaram.

False accusations and long-term separation can constitute mental cruelty, justifying divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act.

Headnote:(A) Family Courts Act, 1984 - Section 19 - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13 - Appeal against dismissal of divorce application - The Family Court dismissed the application citing lack of evidence of cruelty and desertion. The court found no reason to interfere as the marriage was deemed irretrievably broken. (Paras 1, 5, 16, 20)

(B) Mental Cruelty - Definition and examples - The court reiterated that false accusations and malicious prosecution can constitute mental cruelty, justifying divorce. (Paras 10, 14, 19)

(C) Desertion - Definition and implications - The court highlighted that long separation without cohabitation indicates irretrievable breakdown, supporting grounds for divorce. (Paras 13, 20)

Facts of the case:
The appellant-husband sought divorce on grounds of mental cruelty, claiming the respondent-wife displayed unsoundness of mind and had left the matrimonial home without reason. The respondent denied allegations and claimed mental and physical torture due to dowry demands. (Paras 3, 7)

Findings of Court:
The court found that the Family Court did not err in its judgment, as the evidence did not substantiate claims of mental cruelty or desertion. (Paras 16, 20)

Issues: Whether the allegations of mental cruelty and desertion were substantiated to warrant a decree of divorce. (Paras 16, 20)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that false allegations and long-term separation can constitute grounds for mental cruelty, thereby justifying divorce. (Paras 10, 20)

Result: The judgment and decree of the Family Court is set aside, and a decree of divorce is granted along with permanent alimony. (Paras 22, 24)

JUDGMENT :

Hirdesh, J. 

Challenge in this appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is to the judgment and decree dated 10-08-2017 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Gwalior in Case No.339-A of 2012 (HMA), whereby application filed by appellant-husband under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act for grant of decree of divorce, was dismissed.

(2) IA No.5329 of 2022 is an application under Order 41 Rule 27 read with Section 107 of CPC filed by appellant-husband for taking additional evidence on record.

Relying on the judgments of North Eastern Railway Administration Vs. Bhagwan Das (2008) 8 SCC 511 and Sanjay Kumar Singh vs. State of Jharkhand (2022) 7 SCC 247, it is contended on behalf of appellant that the order of acquittal for offence under Section 498-A of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act passed by the Trial Court on 18th of August, 2017 in Criminal Case No.10953 of 2012 was after impugned judgment and decree of the Family Court and appellant has to prove the authenticity and genuineness of additional evidence including contents thereof, which are necessary for just decision of present appeal. On the contrary, learned Counsel for respondent-wife objected to the application and prayed for its rejection.

In view of law laid down in the above-said cited cases, prayer of appellant-husband appears to be reasonable and accordingly, IA is allowed. Documents are taken on record.

(3) Facts of the case, in brief, are that in the divorce application, it was averred on behalf of appellant- husband that his marriage was solemnized with respondent on 27.06.2007 as per Hindu rites and rituals. After marriage, respondent came to her maternal home where her health suddenly deteriorated as a result of which, she became mentally disturbed. Her Father, mother and brother brought her to Gwalior on 02.07.2007 in a car to Psychiatrist Dr.Malhotra. After fifteen days, she came to his house and went to her maternal home on the occasion of Raksh Bandhan. Since marriage, her behaviour towards him and his parents became extremely inhuman. She did not perform any household work, therefore, his father kept a maid. She did not cook and serve food timely. He tried to explain his wife several times, but she used to abuse in filthy languages. She is a woman of stubborn nature and used to pretend to cry on every small things and break valuable articles in his home. She used to fight with him and his parents almost everyday. It was also alleged that she suffered from unsoundness of mind, therefore, she was taken to Dr. S.N. Iyengar on 07-03-2008 and since then, she has been undergoing continuous treatment.

It was further alleged on behalf of appellant- husband that on 21-11-2009, his wife had gone to Orai on the marriage of his aunt's son where she had displayed unsoundness of mind. Thereafter, family members of appellant took her to Dr. Iyengar on 27-11-2009. In January 2010, father of respondent left her in her matrimonial home, Gwalior. Even then, she did not live a happy marital life with him. She had gone to Bhind in July 2010 on the occasion of Raksha Bandhan and Diwali and after that, came back to Gwalior. After a few days, she mentally deranged and started having unsoundness of mind. When her cousin Amit Pathak was called, he told about her state of mind before her marriage.

The husband in his divorce application further alleged that his wife has been behaving like a lunatic since before marriage and is undergoing for same. Her parents did not disclose about insanity to him and his parents and even did not tell her correct age, who is much older than him. Respondent on her volition went to Bhind with her brother Sachin Sharma on 14th of May, 2011 along-with gold and silver jewellery. She has not maintained marital relations with him since one month after marriage. She used to threat him that if he tried to have physical relations with her, she would commit suicide and send him and his family to jail. On 19th of May, 2012, she also ga

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top