The Madhya Pradesh High Court while upholding the dissolution of a couple’s marriage on the grounds of cruelty, has recently stated that the wife’s lack of respect for the Husband or any of his family members would be seen as cruelty towards the husband.
The Court also considered the fact that the wife left her matrimonial home and has been living separately from the husband since 2013 for no just and reasonable reason, and that she is unwilling to live with the husband, making it a valid case of marriage dissolution based on cruelty.
With this, a division bench of Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Virender Singh upheld the findings of the family court, which found that the husband had proven the cruelty, and thus dismissed the wife’s appeal challenging the order passed by the family court, which granted the husband’s petition and passed a decree of divorce.
Essentially, the Husband, a Joint Commissioner Income Tax by profession, and wife got married in 2009, but their marriage did not work, and thus he filed a petition seeking divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion before the Jaipur’s Family Court, subsequently, the petition was later transferred to the Bhopal’s Court as per the Supreme Court orders.
The Family Court found both reasons proved; however, it emphasized that because the statutory term of two years of desertion had not been fulfilled by the time the husband filed his petition, a decree could not be awarded on that basis of desertion.
However, on the basis of ‘cruelty,’ the court granted the petition and dissolved the couple’s marriage by a decree of divorce. The wife moved an appeal before the High Court, challenging the decree.
The wife claimed that the family court ignored the husband’s unjust and unfair treatment of the appellant, and that he filed multiple bogus complaints against her in order to harass her and acquire custody of the kid.
It was also argued that the Court neglected the fact that her petition under Section 498A of the IPC was still pending, and as a result, she sought for the annulment of the divorce decree obtained by the impugned decision.
It was also stated that the husband and his other family members used to tease, humiliate, and torment her for not providing an appropriate dowry, and that the husband became physically abusive on several occasions.
The husband, on the other side, said that his wife is a highly haughty, headstrong, short-tempered, and pompous lady with a complex about being the adored daughter of an IPS officer.
Keeping in view of the submissions and the principles of the preponderance of probability, on the scrutiny of this entire evidence, the Court observed, “On careful reading of statements of the witnesses examined by the respondent/husband before the Family Court, we do not find anything to consider them untrustworthy or doubtful on any of the material aspects. These statements are further corroborated by relevant documents which could not have been rebutted by the appellant/wife; while on the other hand, keeping in mind the traditions, most of the allegations of the appellant regarding post wedding ceremonies or delivery of the baby in Jaipur etc. are usual conduct and expectations of the respondent and his family.”
As a result, the Court rejected the wife’s appeal, finding the Family Court’s ruling granting a decree of divorce in favor of the husband on the grounds of cruelty to be reasonable.
