Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Shree Chandrashekhar, CJ. and
Gautam A. Ankhad, J.
Yogendra Lahu Bhoir and Anr. – Appellants
versus
Prema Yogendra Bhoir and Anr. – Respondents
Family Court Appeal No. 137 of 2019 Along with Interim Application No.15192 of 2024 in
Family Court Appeal No.137 of 2019
Decided on 14.11.2025

Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Ms. Divya A. Pawar with Mr. Krishnakant Deshmukh, Advocates
For the Respondent:Ms. Lucy Massey with Ms. Aarti R. Dharamsey, Advocates

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) A dead marriage must be given a decent quietus.
(2) Cruelty may be physical or mental, intentional or unintentional – When allegation pertains to physical cruelty, it becomes a question of fact and degree.

Headnote:
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 13(1) (i-a) – Divorce – Cruelty and desertion by wife – Several proceedings between parties are still pending – Appellant and respondent are residing separately since 2012 – Neither amicable settlement nor reconciliation was possible between them – Cruelty may be physical or mental, intentional or unintentional – When allegation pertains to physical cruelty, it becomes a question of fact and degree – In cases of mental cruelty, enquiry must first focus on nature of alleged conduct, and thereafter on its impact on mind of aggrieved spouse – Ultimately, whether such conduct gives rise to a reasonable apprehension that it would be harmful or injurious for the spouse to continue living with the other is a matter of inference, to be drawn from nature of conduct and its overall effect on complaining party – threats of suicide by a spouse amount to cruelty – When such conduct is repeated, whether through words, signs or gestures, it becomes impossible for other spouse to continue in matrimonial relationship in a peaceful environment – Absence of police complaint cannot, in every case, be treated as a circumstance against aggrieved spouse, as complaints are often not lodged to avoid further escalation of dispute – Marital relationship between parties has completely broken down and reconciliation is no longer possible – Respondent’s petition for restitution of conjugal rights has already been dismissed – Appellant has contracted a second marriage during subsistence of first and has a child from such relationship – In these circumstances, it is impossible for parties to resume cohabitation – Continuation of such a marriage would only perpetuate cruelty, which parties are inflicting on each other – Marriage between appellant and respondent dissolved by decree of divorce. (Paras 7, 10 and 14)
Result: Family Court Appeal allowed.

JUDGMENT

Gautam A. Ankhad, J.—This is an unfortunate litigation that has lasted for more than a decade. The appellant’s petition seeking divorce and dissolution of his marriage on the ground under Section 13(1) (i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been dismissed by the judgment dated 15th May 2019 passed by the Family Court. He has impugned the same in this appeal.

2. Before we deal with the issues in this appeal, to give a complete perspective for the order we propose to pass, some facts and events that have transpired before the filing of this appeal are stated as under:—

(a) The marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnized on 10th May 2006. On 18th June 2007, the parties were blessed with a son, Harsh Bhoir, who has now attained the age of majority.

(b) From 2008 onwards, marital discord began between the parties. There were several allegations and counter allegations. On 2nd September 2012, the respondent left the matrimonial home and since then, the parties have been residing separately.

(i) On 24th June 2013, the appellant filed a divorce petition before the Family Court, Thane.

(ii) On 24th March 2014, the respondent filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights, i.e., Marriage Petn/600287/2014 before the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Kalyan.

(iii) On 26th March 2015, the respondent filed Criminal Miscellaneous Application being Cri. M.A./1000056/2015 for maintenance before the 7th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ulhasnagar.

(iv) On 16th November 2016, the respondent filed S.C.C./5720 of 2016 before the 4th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Thane.

(v) On 14th October 2019, the respondent initiated proceedings under the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 before 3rd Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Thane, being PWDVA APPLN/400/2019.

(vi) On 1st November 2019, the respondent filed R.C.C./2652/2019 before 4th Joint Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Thane pursuant to FIR registered under sections 323, 354 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

(vii) On 13th January 2021, the respondent filed R.C.C./58/2021 (Bigamy) before the 7th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ulhasnagar.

(viii) On 25th September 2023, the respondent filed R.C.C./1360/2023 before the 7th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ulhasnagar;

(ix) On 16th July 2024, the respondent filed an application for enhancement of maintenance being Cri.M.A./58/2004 before 7th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ulhasnagar.

(x) On 12th June 2024, the respondent filed Cri. M.A./46/2024 (Maintenance Recovery in 1000056/2015) before 7th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ulhasnagar;

(xi) On 27th January 2025, the respondent filed Cri.M.A./537/2025 before 6th Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Thane.

(d) The divorce petition was dismissed on 15th May 2019, and the said judgment is impugned in the present appeal. After the filing of this appeal on 28th June 2019, the respondent’s petition for restitution of conjugal rights was dismissed on 10th March 2023. The respondent’s appeal against that order is presently pending. Further, the respondent’s application for maintenance was partly allowed, and the challenge thereto is pending before the Kalyan Court. The rest of the aforesaid proceedings are still pending.

3. The respondent filed an Interim Application No. 15192 of 2024 in the present appeal for payment of the arrears of maintenance. When it was being heard, the respondent alleged that the appellant had remarried and had stopped paying maintenance as directed by the Family Court. By order dated 14th February 2025, this