The Delhi High Court noted that making false allegations of dowry harassment or rape against members of the husband’s family was an act of extreme cruelty that could not be tolerated. A panel of Judge Suresh Kumar Ket and Judge Neena Bansal Krishna has upheld a family court ruling that gives a husband the right to divorce his wife on grounds of cruelty…
The Delhi High Court noted that making false allegations of dowry harassment or rape against members of the husband’s family was an act of extreme cruelty that could not be tolerated.
division seat Judge Suresh Kumar Kate and Judge Nina Bansal Krishna She upheld the Family Court order giving a husband the right to divorce his wife on grounds of cruelty under Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955.
The court said, after rejecting the wife’s appeal, that the two parties, who married in 2012, have been living separately since 2014, which proves their inability to sustain the marital relationship, which deprives each other of mutual companionship and marital relationship.
“This separation of nearly 9 years is an example of the utmost mental cruelty, and demands immediate severance of the marital relationship on the grounds of cruelty u/S 13(1)(ia) of the Act,” the court said.
The court noted that despite the husband’s claim of not entering into the marriage, his defenses reflect that the wife was resisting his efforts to have intercourse and was always hesitant.
“Furthermore, the defendant (the husband) himself asserted that he had asked the appellant (the wife) to accompany him to the doctor as they had no child. The learned presiding judge rightly referred to the testimony of the parties to conclude that there was no evidence of non-consummation Marriage but there was sufficient evidence to prove reluctance on the part of the appellant, who never came forward.“For the sake of cohabitation,” the court said.
The court also noted that it was an act of extreme cruelty to deprive spouses of each other’s company and marital relationship, a view also upheld by the Supreme Court.
“There is no need to stress that the cornerstone of any marital relationship is cohabitation and the marital relationship. The court said that depriving the spouses of each other’s company proves that the marriage cannot continue, and such deprivation of the marital relationship is an act of extreme cruelty.
She also noted the acquittal of the husband and his brother in the FIR, which the wife had registered with allegations of rape.
“It cannot be condoned that making serious allegations, not only of dowry harassment, but of rape against members of the defendant’s family, which were found to be false, is an act of extreme cruelty which cannot be condoned,” the court said.
The court also noted that the false complaints filed by the wife against the husband constituted psychological cruelty against him.
Since the husband also claimed that his wife had failed to do her home duties since the day of marriage and was visiting her parents’ home frequently without informing him and his family members, the court indicated that she even threatened to commit suicide and implicate him and his family members in it. false cases.
“The learned Chief Judge, Family Court has rightly concluded that the defendant is entitled to divorce on grounds of cruelty under Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955,” the panel said.
Case Title: A v. S
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (del) 780