[2026:RJ-JP:7356-DB]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1003/2019 Smt. Manju Devi W/o Vinod Kumar Soni D/o Lalit Kumar Soni, B/c Soni R/o Village Didwana Tehsil Lalsot District Dausa (Raj)

----Appellant Versus Vinod Kumar Soni S/o Mahesh Kumar Soni Sunaliya, B/c Soni R/o 21-A, Chitrakut Colony, Jhotwara Jaipur (Raj)

----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta Mr. Rahul Sharma Ms. Chanchal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Mr. Ritul Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

Judgment

16/02/2026

1. Appellant-wife is before us in this appeal, to assail the decree of divorce dated 25.01.2019 passed in favour of husband on his divorce petition bearing case No.2/2016 (CIS No.13/2016) by Additional District Judge, Lalsot, District Dausa.

2. Marriage between parties was solemnized on 30.11.2010 and out of this wedlock, a daughter born to wife on 24.01.2013. Thereafter, their matrimonial relations turned strained and wife filed a criminal case for the offence under Sections 498-A & 406 of IPC against her husband and left matrimonial home. Since 18.01.2016, wife is living separately from her husband and in the criminal case, husband has been acquitted vide judgment dated

27.02.2025.

3. In the evidence of parties, it has come on record that wife levelled allegations against her husband to have illicit and extra marital relationship with his bhabhi and such allegations were not proved. In the statement of wife (NAW-1), she clearly denied to return to matrimonial home to live with husband. In this backdrop of evidence, trial Court passed the decree of dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty and desertion in favour of husband.

4. Counsel for appellant-wife, during course of argument, pointed out that specific issues of cruelty and desertion were not framed by the trial Court and a general issue was framed hence the impugned judgment stands vulnerable.

5. In the light of argument of counsel for appellant, we considered the judgment and findings of Family Court. It is true that only a general issue has been framed by the trial Court but in the body of judgment, the points of cruelty and desertion have been considered in detail. In the divorce petition, pleadings to constitute grounds of cruelty and desertion were made and wife could understand the true nature of divorce petition that same has been filed on the grounds of cruelty and desertion and the averments of divorce petition were replied accordingly. Concededly, both parties also adduced their evidence with full awareness that the issues of cruelty and desertion are involved in this divorce petition. Hence not framing of specific issues, does not lead to any adversarial effect on the interest and right of appellant. As far as merits of findings of facts on the point of cruelty and desertion is concerned, no perversity, manifest illegality or jurisdictional error has been pointed out, hence, warrant no interference in appeal.

Therefore, although we do not appreciate the practice of trial Court of not framing specific issues of cruelty and desertion, and deprecate this practice of trial Court but on merits do not find that any prejudice caused to wife, due to not framing of specific issues. 6. In addition to the findings of cruelty and desertion, in view of a subsequent fact that husband has been acquitted from the charges of offence under Sections 498-A & 406 of IPC, it is apparent that wife falsely implicated and prosecuted the husband in a criminal case. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Rani Narasimha Sastry Vs. Rani Suneela Rani [(2020) 18 SCC 247], held and observed that when a person undergoes a trial in which he is acquitted from allegation of offence under Section 498-A IPC, levelled by wife against the husband, it cannot be accepted that no cruelty has been meted out on the husband. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, finally granted a decree of divorce in favour of husband on the groun