Recently, the Allahabad High Court explained that the burden of proof to prove incurable insanity or mental disorder under section 13(1)(iii) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, lies upon the party accusing the same and held that, "Unless the pre-existing and irreversible mental condition of the respondent had been proven and unless by its very nature that condition was such as to give the appellant a reason to seek dissolution of his marriage under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Act, the fact thus proven remained extraneous to the grounds raised.”
ad HC JudgmentThe court also embellished the standard of proof required for obtaining a divorce on the ground of mental disorder.
Brief Facts
The Appellant husband married the Respondent wife in the year 2005 and both parties lived together for almost 7 years. During this period, they were blessed with 2 daughters. However, the parties ultimately starting staying separately since January 2012. Later, the appellant approached the Additional District Judge, Fatehpur, praying for Divorce from the Respondent on grounds of Insanity as incorporated under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Hereinafter, “HMA”). The trial court dismissed the divorce case, leading to the present appeal before the Allahabad High Court.
Issues
- Whether the burden to prove insanity of the wife lay upon the Appellant
- Whether the alleged mental condition of the respondent met the statutory criteria for ingredients of “incurably of unsound mind” or a “mental disorder” as provided under section 13(1)(iii) of HMA
Contentions of Appellant
The Appellant took the plea that the gravity of mental illness was such which met the criteria as enumerated under section 13(1)(iii) of HMA. The Appellant contended that before the trial court he led both oral and documentary evidence in support of his case and that apart from him, 2 other witnesses were examined to prove the same. For documentary evidence, the Appellant filed a medical prescription from a doctors and medical test reports in support of his contention. In furtherance to the above, the appellant pleaded to being subjected cruelty arising from the insane behaviour of the respondent.
Contentions of Respondent
Per contra, the respondent asserted that there was a lack of concrete evidence and sufficient medical opinion of expert to establish the insanity or the mental disorder of the respondent. Furthermore, she led oral evidence, apart from her own testimony and the examination of 2 other witnesses. In manner of documentary evidence, respondent filed documents including her high school and graduation certificates to prove that she was well educated.
Observation of the Court
The court perused the evidences and noted that the weight of the evidences put forth by the appellant was not so severe as to meet the burden of proof standard as required under section 13(1)(iii) of HMA.
Regarding issue no. one, the HC pointed out that, “Thus, the appellant was burdened to establish either that the respondent was incurably of unsound mind or that she had been afflicted by such a medical condition as may be described as a continuous or intermittent mental disorder of a kind in which the appellant may not be reasonably expected to live with the respondent”
Regarding what would qualify as a mental disorder under the purview of S. 13(1)(iii), the bench explained that, “As to what medical condition qualifies as mental disorder, the Explanation leaves no doubt. It must be a medical illness involving arrested or incomplete development of the mind, psychopathic disorder or any other disorder or disability of the mind, including schizophrenia. Further, ‘psychopathic disorder’ has also been defined as a persistent disorder or disability of the mind that may result in abnormally aggressive or seriously irresponsible conduct on the part of the person alleged to be afflicted by such a condition.”
The High Court observed that, “All that the appellant had been able to prove was that the respondent was not regular with her medicines as prescribed by Dr. S.B. Joshi. That fact is neither here nor there. Unless the pre-existing and irreversible mental condition of the respondent had been proven and unless by its very nature that condition was such as to give the appellant a reason to seek dissolution of his marriage under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Act, the fact thus proven remained extraneous to the grounds raised.”
Regarding the above, the high court bench also noted that, “no material or evidence has been shown to exist on the record that may lead us to doubt the correctness of the other finding recorded by the learned trial Court as to lack of proof of insanity and cruelty alleged by the appellant. Further, no material has been shown to us that may prompt us to record any different or further finding of fact. Thus, no ground for divorce, either on account of insanity or cruelty, is made out.”
Decision
The Allahabad High Court upheld the order of the trial court and dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in the Appellant’s assailment of insanity due lack of sufficient evidence. The court held that, “Thus, there is no ground to interfere with the order impugned. The appeal lacks merit and is dismissed. No order as to costs.”
Case Title: Shiv Sagar v. Smt. Poonam Devi
Citation: Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:139479-DB
Court: Allahabad High Court
Coram: Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Donadi Ramesh
Date: August 30, 2024
To Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com:
Picture Source :