2026:CGHC:6909-DB Digitally SAIFAN signed NAFR by KHAN SAIFAN KHAN HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR FAM No. 63 of 2016 Badrinath Devangan S/o Shri Shankar Prasad Devangan, Aged About- During Course Of Filing Divorce Petition 54 Years, Now 56 Years, R/o Devanganpara, Juna Bilaspur, Tahsil And Dist. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Appellant Versus Smt. Sarswati Devangan D/o Khushiram Mehar, Aged About 48 Years W/o Badrinath Devangan, R/o Gaurishankar Mandir Road, Near Old Gurudwara, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent [Cause-title taken from Case Information System (CIS)]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Appellant : Mr. Hemant Gupta, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Sangeeta Mishra, Advocate -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Division Bench Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice and Hon'ble Mr. Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Judgment on Board (06.02.2026)

Per: Ramesh Sinha, CJ

1. In this appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, the appellant- husband is calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of impugned order dated 19.01.2016 (Annexure-F/01), passed by the learned Family Court, Bilaspur, whereby his application filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking a decree of divorce and dissolution of his marriage with the respondent herein has been rejected.

2. The facts of the case, in short, is that the marriage of the appellant was solemnized with the respondent on 12.03.1986 and, out of the said wedlock, they were blessed with two issues. It is the case of the appellant that after the marriage, it came to his knowledge that his wife (respondent herein) has been suffering from incurable mental disorder, namely, Schizophrenia prior to their marriage and, on account of which, she used to go her maternal home without informed him. On being enquired about the same, the father of the respondent did not inform him the truth at any point of time and, the respondent, even without informing, used to live out of her home for several day. It is also alleged by the appellant that the respondent, being a mother, did not take care about their children, indeed, they were tortured by her. The respondent and the appellant are continuously living separately for about 14 years and meanwhile the respondent lodged false report against the appellant making allegation of demand of dowry and loss of social integrity. Therefore, on 17.07.2013, the appellant-husband filed an application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the learned Family Court, Bilaspur seeking a decree of divorce and dissolution of his marriage with the respondent. But, the learned Family Court vide impugned order dated 19.01.2016 (Annexure-F/01) rejected the said application of the appellant on the ground that the appellant-husband failed to prove that his wife (respondent herein) is suffering from incurable mental disorder and, on account of which, he suffered mental cruelty. Aggrieved, the instant appeal has been preferred.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the learned Family Court is absolutely unjustified in rejected the application of the appellant-husband for dissolution of his marriage with the respondent-wife by recording findings which are perverse and contrary to the record. He also submits that the appellant is living separately for past 17 years alongwith his children and no matrimonial relation has been consummated in these long periods, nor there is any chance or possibility of their reunion. Hence, the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court dated 19.01.2016 (Annexure-F/01) deserves to be set aside and the application filed by the appellant seeking a decree of divorce is liable to be allowed.

4. Per-contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent supported the impugned order and prays for dismissal of this appeal.

5. We have heard learn