Case Note & Summary
The appellant-husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking divorce on grounds of cruelty and desertion. The parties married on 29-04-2002. On 12-04-2003, the wife suffered burn injuries while seven months pregnant, leading to an FIR against the husband and his mother under Sections 498-A, 307 read with 34 IPC. They were acquitted in Sessions Case No.84 of 2003 on 20-02-2007. The wife also filed a maintenance suit (Special Civil Suit No.45 of 2004) which was decided in her favour on 08-04-2009. The husband alleged that the wife's false criminal complaint and maintenance suit constituted cruelty, and that she deserted him after his acquittal. The trial court dismissed the petition on 29-08-2011, and the first appellate court dismissed the appeal on 08-01-2016. In second appeal, the High Court framed substantial questions of law regarding cruelty and desertion. The court held that the husband failed to prove cruelty as the criminal complaint was not proved false, and filing a maintenance suit is not cruelty. Regarding desertion, the court found that the wife had reasonable cause to stay away due to the husband's conduct and lack of genuine offer to resume cohabitation. The concurrent findings were upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Hindu Marriage Act - Divorce - Cruelty - Section 13(1)(ia) - Burden of proof - The husband alleged cruelty by wife due to false criminal complaint and filing of maintenance suit - Held that acquittal in criminal case does not per se prove cruelty; filing of maintenance suit is not cruelty; husband failed to prove mental or physical cruelty (Paras 8-12).
B) Hindu Marriage Act - Divorce - Desertion - Section 13(1)(ib) - Essential ingredients - Husband claimed wife deserted him after acquittal - Held that wife's refusal to live with husband was justified due to husband's conduct and lack of bonafide offer to resume cohabitation; desertion not proved (Paras 13-16).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the husband proved that the wife treated him with cruelty and deserted him for a continuous period of not less than two years prior to filing the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The concurrent findings of the trial court and first appellate court are upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Burden of proof on petitioner to establish cruelty and desertion
- Acquittal in criminal case does not automatically prove cruelty
- Filing of maintenance suit not cruelty
- Wife's refusal to live with husband after acquittal not desertion if justified by circumstances
Case Details
2019 LawText (BOM) (08) 12
Second Appeal No.650 of 2016
Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.
Mr. M. S. Kulkarni for Appellant, Mr. N. P. Patil Jamalpurkar for Respondent
Shri Deepak Gangaram Ahirrao (Patil)
Sau Sunita Deepak Ahirrao
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Second appeal against concurrent dismissal of husband's petition for divorce under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Remedy Sought
Husband sought divorce on grounds of cruelty and desertion.
Filing Reason
Husband alleged that wife treated him with cruelty by filing false criminal complaint and maintenance suit, and deserted him after his acquittal.
Previous Decisions
Trial court dismissed husband's petition on 29-08-2011; first appellate court dismissed appeal on 08-01-2016.
Issues
Whether the husband proved that the wife treated him with cruelty within the meaning of Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955?
Whether the husband proved that the wife deserted him for a continuous period of not less than two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955?
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that wife's false criminal complaint and filing of maintenance suit amounted to cruelty, and that she deserted him after his acquittal.
Respondent argued that the criminal complaint was not false as she suffered burn injuries, and that she had reasonable cause to stay away due to husband's conduct.
Ratio Decidendi
Acquittal in criminal case does not automatically prove that the complaint was false or that it amounted to cruelty. Filing of a maintenance suit is not an act of cruelty. Desertion requires proof of animus deserendi and absence of reasonable cause; wife's refusal to live with husband was justified due to husband's conduct and lack of genuine offer to resume cohabitation.
Judgment Excerpts
Acquittal in criminal case does not per se prove that the complaint was false or that it amounted to cruelty.
Filing of a suit for maintenance is not an act of cruelty.
Desertion is not proved if the wife has reasonable cause to stay away and the husband fails to make a bonafide offer to resume cohabitation.
Procedural History
Husband filed Hindu Marriage Petition No.121 of 2010 under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amalner, which was dismissed on 29-08-2011. Husband appealed to District Court, which was dismissed as Regular Civil Appeal No.34 of 2011 by Adhoc District Judge-1, Amalner on 08-01-2016. Husband then filed Second Appeal No.650 of 2016 before Bombay High Court, which was dismissed on 23-08-2019.
Acts & Sections
- Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: Section 13
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: Section 498-A, Section 307, Section 34
