Case Note & Summary
The husband, employed as a police constable, filed a divorce petition before the Family Court, Sivagangai, under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty. He alleged that after their marriage on 25.4.2012 and the birth of a male child, the wife pressurized him to transfer to Coimbatore and made false police complaints when he refused. The wife contested the petition, denying the allegations and making counter-allegations of the husband having an affair with a divorcee. The trial court, after examining two witnesses and seven exhibits on the husband’s side and two witnesses along with photographs on the wife’s side, dismissed the petition, holding that the alleged pressure for transfer and police complaints did not constitute cruelty, and disbelieving refusal of cohabitation given the existence of a child. The husband appealed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984. The High Court scrutinized the complaints marked as Ex.P6 and Ex.P7, which were sent by the wife to high officials including the Chief Minister’s Cell, Human Rights Commission, and police superiors, levelling allegations that the husband was a terrorist and had contacts with foreign outfits. These complaints were made after the institution of the divorce petition and also after she left the matrimonial home without intimation. The court observed that the wife had also initiated domestic violence proceedings and had not taken care of the minor child. It held that such wild allegations against a uniformed officer naturally caused severe mental torture and cruelty, falling within the definition of cruelty under the Act, and that the wife’s subsequent marriage to another person in 2020 further indicated her lack of interest in the marital relationship. The court concluded that the trial court erred in appreciating the evidence and that the marriage was unworkable. Accordingly, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the trial court’s order, and dissolved the marriage by a decree of divorce. No order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Family Law - Divorce - Cruelty - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 13(1)(i-a) - The appellant, a police constable, sought divorce on ground of cruelty after his wife filed complaints with the Chief Minister’s Cell, Human Rights Commission, Director General of Police and Superintendent of Police, accusing him of being a terrorist and having an extra-marital affair. The trial court dismissed the petition, finding that mere complaints did not amount to cruelty. On appeal, the High Court examined the complaints (Ex.P6 and Ex.P7) and held that such wild allegations, particularly against a uniformed officer, naturally caused severe mental torture and amounted to cruelty, rendering the marital relationship unworkable. The wife had also left the minor child, did not care for him, and later married another person, indicating disinterest in saving the marriage. Held that the trial court failed to appreciate the evidence properly, and the appeal was allowed, granting a decree of divorce. (Paras 7-9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court’s finding that the husband failed to prove cruelty for divorce was correct; whether the appellant is entitled to decree of divorce on ground of cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, based on false police complaints and allegations of terrorist links and extra-marital affair.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Order of trial court set aside. Marriage solemnized on 25.4.2012 dissolved by decree of divorce. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- False and wild allegations against a spouse
- especially a police officer
- made to higher officials causing mental torture constitute mental cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act
- 1955
- Complaints lodged after institution of divorce proceedings indicating intent to sever marital relationship
- Wilful withdrawal from consortium and desertion coupled with false allegations render marriage unworkable.
