Back
MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Vishal Dhagat and Anuradha Shukla, JJ.
Abhisheikh Shrivastava – Appellant
versus
Dipika Khare – Respondent
First Appeal No. 58 of 2020
Decided on 15.10.2025
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Shri Pushp Raj Singh Gaharwar - Advocate
For the Respondent: None
IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Divorce – Egoistic approach cannot be accommodated under provisions of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
(2) In marital relationship mutual trust is the golden thread that weaves affection and admiration in life of married couples and it gets impaired when unfounded and defamatory allegations are made by one against other.
Headnote:
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 13 – Divorce – Cruelty and desertion by wife – No police report or complaint was made by respondent/wife regarding demand of dowry – Making allegations is the easiest adventure, but proving them is a burdensome task – Heavy burden lies upon spouse to be sensitive and careful while making any such allegations against other spouse – Respondent/wife was making allegations very casually – Respondent/wife was expecting appellant/husband to visit her place and persuade her to restore matrimonial relationship – Her inordinate insistence gives impression that her inflated ego was restraining her to restore marital ties while she herself had left matrimonial house – This egoistic approach cannot be accommodated under provisions of Hindu Marriage Act – Respondent/wife was guilty of deserting appellant/husband without any reasonable cause – Divorce petition deserves to be allowed on the ground of desertion – In marital relationship mutual trust is the golden thread that weaves affection and admiration in life of married couples and it gets impaired when unfounded and defamatory allegations are made by one against other – Divorce petition deserves to be allowed on the ground of cruelty as well – Marriage solemnized between parties dissolved. (Paras 10, 11, 12, 14, 15 and 16)
Result: Appeal allowed.
ORDER
Anuradha Shukla, J.—Appellant/husband is aggrieved of judgment and decree dated 05.12.2019 passed in Civil Suit No.154/2015 by Principal Judge Family Court, Satna whereby his divorce petition filed on the grounds of cruelty and desertion was dismissed.
2. Facts undisputed between the parties are that they were married on 29.11.2008 and respondent wife after staying for a month and half in matrimonial house, went to her parental house in Pratapgarh on 15.01.2009. It is also not denied specifically that on 29.06.2011, she came back to her matrimonial house and lived there until 29.02.2012. Admittedly, she gave birth to a girl child in Rewa on 05.05.2012, but appellant/husband did not visit her on this occasion. It is not in dispute that respondent/wife started a job in Ankleshwar, Gujrat and filed a case for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in the Court of JMFC Ankleshwar, wherein maintenance amounts of Rs.5,000/- and Rs.3,000/- were allowed in favour of respondent/wife and her daughter respectively. It is also not in dispute that a petition under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights was filed by the appellant/husband, however, he later withdrew it.
3. The grounds raised in the divorce petition are that the behaviour of wife with appellant/husband and his family members was very discourteous; she used to threaten the husband that she would find job in Delhi and live there with her male friend with whom she was still maintaining relationship. After initially staying only for some days in matrimonial house, she came back on 12.06.2012 and stayed this time for almost 8 months, but she never informed the appellant/husband that she was bearing a child and on 29.02.2012 when she finally left the matrimonial house, she did not let him know that her delivery was due in May, 2012. Later, appellant/husband came to know that she gave birth to a girl child in her relative’s nursing home in Rewa. It was very disturbing for appellant to know that such important facts like conceiving the child and giving birth to her were kept secret from him. Even after delivery, respondent/wife did not return to matrimonial house and went to her parental house claiming that she would be better looked after there. Appellant and his family members tried a lot to contact her, but they were told not to meddle in her life. Respondent/wife started her job in Gujrat and gave false information about matrimonial disputes to the employers of appellant which led to his termination from service, rendering him jobless.
The health of parents of appellant deteriorated on account of this family stress. Appellant/husband decided to withdraw of his application under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act as wife had no interest in restoration of marital ties. A request was therefore made to allow the divorce petition on the grounds of cruelty and desertion.
4. Respondent/wife challenged the divorce petition claiming that she was being harassed to an extent that leaving the matrimonial house was only option for her. She went to her parental house on 15.01.2009 and her relatives met her in-laws; discontent about insufficient dowry was expressed in this meeting by the parents of appellant and demand for further dowry was also made. In the meanwhile, the appellant /husband went Australia and telephonically informed the wife that he had solemnized second marriage over there. He strongly opposed the request of respondent/wife to allow her to join him in Australia. This compelled her to get a job in Delhi. On 12.06.2010, appellant returned to India, but was against of respondent coming back to Satna. She, on her own, came to matrimonial house in August, 2010 and stayed there almost two months, but their relationship continued to languish and threats of divorce continued to be given. Respondent/wife again joined her job and on 29.06.2011 when she, along with her relatives, came back to matrimonial house, was allowed entry only with much resistance. H
