Filing a false criminal complaint under Section 498-A IPC resulting in acquittal, combined with voluntary desertion and refusal to resume conjugal society, constitutes mental cruelty justifying a decree of divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

JUDGMENT :

K. Lakshman, J.

Heard Mr. Muppu Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel representing Mr. K. Ravikanth, learned counsel for the Appellant, and Mr. M.V. Hanumantha Rao, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent.

2. Appellant is the wife and Respondent is the husband.

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order and decree dated 23.10.2017 in OP No. 972 of 2013, passed by the XVI Additional District and Sessions Judge – cum – XVI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge – cum – III Additional Family Judge, Ranga Reddy District at Malkajgiri, the Appellant-wife preferred the present appeal.

3. The Appellant-wife and the Respondent-husband got married on 16.02.2012. It was an arranged marriage, performed as per Hindu rites and customs. Out of the wedlock, they were blessed with a female child.

4. The Respondent-husband filed the aforesaid petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter, “the Act”) seeking dissolution of marriage with the Appellant-wife on the ground of cruelty with the following contentions:

i. His marriage with the Appellant was solemnized on 16.02.2012 as per Hindu rites and customs in the presence of family and community elders.

ii. After marriage, they lived together in the house situated at Kummari Bhasti, Amberpet. Their marriage was consummated and they were blessed with a female child named Bhagyasree.

iii. They lived together only for a period of one month after marriage, and thereafter she left his company without informing anyone.

iv. In the month of May 2012, he got to know that the Appellant was pregnant. On knowing the same, he along with his family went to her house and requested her parents to send her along with them, but the Appellant bluntly refused stating that if the Respondent was interested, he shall leave his parents’ house and take a separate residence at her parents’ place.

v. While they were staying together, she always wanted freedom and separation from him. She was not bothered about his welfare.

vi. She created inferiority complex in his mind stating that he was earning only around Rs. 6,000/- per month, whereas as the Respondent had completed her M.Sc. and B.Ed, she could earn more that Rs. 20,000/- per month. She asked him to rather sit at home and look after household chores.

vii. She abused him and his parents in vulgar language and disrespected them. She was not affectionate and did not lead a happy matrimonial life with him.

viii. She threatened and blackmailed him that she would commit suicide and shift the blame on him, and that she would foist false dowry harassment case against him and his family members. She caused mental agony and harassment to him.

ix. He made efforts to bring her back to join his society to lead a happy marital life with him but she and her parents did not show any interest and his efforts were futile.

x. After the birth of the child, he and his family went to the Appellant’s parents’ house to bring her back along with the child, but they stated that she was not interested in living with him and informed that she was going to file a petition for divorce.

xi. She lodged a false complaint with the police in the month of March 2013 and on enquiry by the police, they warned her not to file false complaints.

xii. She deserted him without any reason in the month of March 2012. Despite that he was ready to take her. Thereafter, he issued a legal notice dated 08.04.2013 calling upon the Appellant to join his society. She issued a Reply Notice dated 22.04.2013, with a malafide intention and made baseless allegations. She stated that she was not interested to join his society and demanded return of articles and money. In fact, she took away all the articles, belongings, and jewelry along with her while leaving the house.

xiii. She voluntarily deserted him and subjected him to mental cruelty. There is no chance of reunion.

5. With the said contentions, the Respondent-husband sought dissolution of marriage with the Appellant on the ground of cruelt