IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: February 25, 2025 Manju .….Appellant versus Sunil …. Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR Present:- Mr. Hemant Hans, Advocate for the appellant.

*****

SUDHIR SINGH, J.

Challenge in the present appeal is to the judgment and decree dated

18.01.2025 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Rohtak (for short ‘Family Court’), whereby, the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) filed by the respondent/husband was allowed, and marriage between the parties was dissolved by way of a decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion.

2. The aforesaid petition had been filed by the respondent/husband, inter alia, pleading therein that his marriage with the appellant/wife was solemnized on 22.11.2004 according to Hindu rites, and out of the said wedlock, a male child was born, who was in the custody of the appellant/wife. After sometime of the marriage, the appellant/wife started taunting and harassing the respondent/husband and his family members. She used to insult him in the presence of his family members and would leave the matrimonial home without the permission of the respondent/husband. She used to pressurize him to live separately from his family. They started living separately at Nazafgarh, Delhi, but she again started harassing the respondent/husband. The parents of the appellant/wife brought her from Nazafgarh and a criminal case bearing FIR No.751 dated 12.10.2010 was got registered by her under Sections 498-A/406 of IPC against the respondent/husband and his family members. It was further alleged that in the said FIR, the respondent/husband and his family members were acquitted of the charge(s) framed against them. The appellant/wife had filed a petition under Section 125 of the Cr. P.C., in which the respondent/husband was regularly paying the maintenance. It was further alleged that in September, 2010, the appellant/wife left the company of the respondent/husband and since then, she had been residing at her parental home.

3. Upon notice, the appellant/wife entered appearance and filed her written statement. It was alleged that the respondent/husband could not be permitted to take advantage of his own wrongs. The allegations regarding cruelty and interference by the parents of the appellant/wife were denied. It was further alleged that the FIR No.751 aforesaid was based on true facts and the acquittal of the respondent/husband and his family members in the said FIR was no ground to infer that the said FIR was based on false facts. It was further alleged that the respondent/husband had neglected to maintain the appellant/wife and the minor child and she had to file a petition under Section 125 of the Cr. P.C. for maintenance. It was yet further alleged that she was turned out of the matrimonial home on 06.09.2010 after having been given severe beatings. The respondent/husband and his family members had harassed and tortured her for brining insufficient dowry. In 2007, when the appellant/wife was turned out of the matrimonial home, an application was moved to the Crime Against Women cell, Rohtak. A compromise was arrived at on 17.07.2007 and on the assurance of the respondent/husband, the appellant/wife was sent with him. The respondent/husband continued giving her beatings despite the fact that her father had given Rs.40,000/- on the demand of the respondent/husband. It was further alleged that the aforesaid FIR had been registered due to the beatings given to her and turning her out of the matrimonial home.

4. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the learned Family Court:-

“1. Whether the respondent has treated the petitioner with cruelty after solemnization of marriage between the parties?

OPP

2. Whether the respondent has deserted the petitioner for a continuous period of not less than two years immediately preced