IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 13.02.2025 YASH PAUL ...Appellant Versus PAWAN KUMARI ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR Present:- Mr. A.S. Manaise, Advocate for appellant.

Mr. Rajeev Dev Sharma, Advocate for respondent.

SUDHIR SINGH, J.

Challenge in the present appeal is to the judgment and decree dated 06.02.2020, passed by the learned Family Court, Pathankot, whereby the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) filed by the appellant-

husband, was dismissed.

2. The aforesaid petition had been filed by the appellant- husband, inter alia, pleading therein that his marriage with the respondent-wife was solemnized on 12.06.2011, according to Hindu rites. It was further pleaded that the appellant-husband was serving in the Indian Army as Havaldar and posted in Command Hospital, Therapy Department, Chandimandir, Chandigarh. When the appellant-husband had been on leave in November, 2011, he came to know about the conversion of the religion of the respondent-wife and her family members from Hindu to Christian. When confronted, the respondent-wife did not give any satisfactory reply. In March, 2012, the appellant-husband again came on leave and stayed with the respondent-wife till 28.03.2012. At that time, the respondent-wife told him that she could not live alone in the matrimonial home in the absence of the appellant-husband and she wanted to reside in her parental home, to which the appellant-husband agreed. When the appellant-husband reported for his duties, he was told by his family members that the respondent-wife had left the matrimonial home without any intimation and had also taken away the entire gold ornaments and Rs.50,000/- as cash. The respondent-wife had put pressure upon the appellant-husband to snap his ties with his family and rather, stay at her parental house as a ‘Ghar Jawai’ and he was also pressurized to convert his religion from Hindu to Christian. The appellant-husband had taken Panchayats to the parental house of the respondent-wife for reconciliation, but to no avail. Later on, the respondent-wife had agreed to reside with the appellant-husband at Kolkata (the place of posting of the appellant-husband). It was asserted that on 20.09.2012, the father and brother of the respondent- wife came to Kolkata and took her back without the consent of the appellant-husband. On 19.10.2012, when the appellant-husband went to the parental house of the respondent-wife to bring her back, he had been given severe beatings by the family members of the respondent- wife. He had filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act for restitution of conjugal rights at Pathankot. However, upon receiving the summons of the case, the father and brother of the respondent-wife became aggressive and on 22.11.2012, they along with certain other muscle-men armed with weapons, forcibly entered the house of the appellant-husband at Village Jagatpur, causing injuries to his brother and sister-in-law. In the petition under Section 9 of the Act, the respondent-wife appeared and had suffered a statement that she was not ready to live with the appellant-husband and accordingly, the said petition was withdrawn.

3. Upon notice, the respondent-wife entered appearance and filed her written statement, admitting the factum of marriage. However, it was alleged that after marriage, the parents of the appellant-husband started humiliating, insulting and beating the respondent-wife and also caused her injuries on 10.09.2011, whereafter she was taken to Oberoi Hospital, Pathankot for treatment. It was because of the aforesaid mental and physical cruelty that the respondent-wife had to come back to her parental house. It was further alleged that in March, 2012, when the appellant-husband came on leave, he had demanded a sum of Rs.5 Lakh as dowry for clearing his debt. With the intervention of the respectables, the matter was compromi