Recently, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has decreed a divorce and reiterated that levelling false accusations against the spouse would amount to 'cruelty'.
The Division Bench comprising of Justice Ritu Bahri and Justice Nidhi Gupta while weighing on the seriousness of the nature of the allegations, noted that if such accusations are false, it is bound to do all sorts of harm to the appellant-husband.
"Here the allegations are levelled by a highly educated spouse and they do have the propensity to irreparably damage the character and reputation of the appellant. When the reputation of the spouse is sullied amongst his colleagues, his superiors and the society at large, it would be difficult to expect condonation of such conduct by the affected party.”
Brief Facts of the Case
The Court was dealing with an appeal filed by the husband against District Court order whereby his petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 seeking dissolution of his marriage with the respondent-wife on the ground of cruelty and desertion has been dismissed.
The parties married according to Sikh rites and ceremonies in 2012. After marriage they cohabited together as husband and wife but that only lasted 9 months. It was the appellant's case that after their marriage the respondent started pressurising him to leave his job so as to settle in Patiala where her parental home was. He stated that she was dominating and disrespectful to him and his family and picked up quarrel for no reasons. She was also stated to have physically assaulted the petitioner at times and misbehaved with him and insulted him in the presence of his relatives and friends. It was further alleged that the respondent frequently behaved offensively and arrogantly using bad language, and would lock herself up in her room for hours threatening to do something drastic and implicate the appellant in criminal case involving non-bailable offences.
He submitted that all the above caused him great mental tension and agony. One day in 2013, without any reasonable cause she left the house and took away all her dowry articles including the ones given to her by the appellant’s parents and she did not join the appellant’s company thereafter though he requested and pleaded with her several times. It was thus pleaded that she deserted the appellant-husband.
On the other hand, respondent denied all the allegations and stated that in fact she had been deserted by the appellant. She stated that prior to her marriage she had worked as Ayurvedic Medical Officer for four years in the State Health Department. However, she had been forced by the appellant to leave her Government job.
Allegations of torture, illegal demand of dowry, beating and not providing her maintenance were levelled. She further stated that the appellant constantly mocked her abusively for bringing inadequate dowry and made her work as domestic help and would lock her in room for hours together. This had led to her filing case against him under Section 406/ 498-A, 377 IPC.
The appellant filed replication before the trial Court controverting the abovesaid allegations of the respondent and stated that the respondent had filed innumerable false complaints against the appellant and his family.
Counsel for the appellant has vehemently submitted that the respondent has caused great ignominy, embarrassment, harassment and and loss of reputation to the appellant by making utterly false allegations against him and his entire family before his seniors and colleagues, as also to the senior officers of the Punjab Police.
The respondent had made innumerable vicious and vindictive complaints before every forum and platform that she could find from the Army Headquarters, Air Force Headquarters, Army/Air Force Wives Welfare Association, National Commission for Women, this Court, as well as senior police officers of the Punjab Police and subjected the appellant's family to tremendous mental agony and cruelty
High Court's Observation
The Court at the outset noted that Trial Court's factually incorrect as a perusal of the record reveals that the respondent has levelled the most objectionable allegations against the appellant and his family.
The most obnoxious of these can be said to be the imputations she has made against her father-in-law stating that he used to behave inappropriately towards her, the Court said.
Noting that this Court, as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court have held in numerous decisions that false allegations made by a party against the spouse or his/her family, amount to cruelty, the Court observed that in this case, the respondent has unequivocally admitted in her cross-examination that her complaint against her father in law alleging inappropriate behaviour was found to be false by the police, and therefore he was not challaned.
The Court was of the view that Lower Court has not dealt with this aspect at all.
Disagreeing with the Counsel for Respondent's view, the Court cited K.Srinivas Vs. K. Sunita, 2014 Latest Caselaw 716 SC and observed:
"Despite the above admissions on the part of the respondent, the ld. Court below has rejected this fact and held that even though the respondent had filed so many complaints but no cruelty is made out because all these complaints had been made after the appellant had filed the petition for divorce."
Referring to Joydeep Majumdar Vs. Bharti Jaiswal Majumdar, 2021 Latest Caselaw 100 SC, its reaffirmed that if the wife files frequent and frivolous complaints against her spouse, it amounts to cruelty and is sufficient ground for divorce.
The Court also mentioned Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam Vs. State of Bihar, 2022 Latest Caselaw 134 SC, Raj Talreja Vs. Kavita Talreja, 2017 Latest Caselaw 358 SC to rest the case in appellant's favour.
"In our view, the conduct of the parties in the present case evidences that there are irreconcilable differences between the parties, rendering the marriage, as of today, a mere legal fiction. It is not in dispute that the parties are residing separately since 2013. Even mediation attempts between the parties have remained unsuccessful."
To this tune, the Court remarked that though irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not available as a ground under the statute, yet, the reality of it has been recognised by the Supreme Court in a catena of decisions and cited ‘N. Rajendran v. S. Valli’.
Stating that the parties have been living separately for the last almost ten years, the Court made referrence to Naveen Kohli Vs. Neelu Kohli, 2006 Latest Caselaw 135 SC wherein the Supreme Court granted Divorce based on the ground of 'irretrievable breakdown of marriage'.\
CASE TITLE: Ratandeep Singh Ahuja VS Harpreet Kaur
CASE DETAILS: FAO-M-182 of 2017
CORAM: Justice Ritu Bahri and Justice Nidhi Gupta
Read Judgement @LatestLaws.com:
Share this Document :Picture Source :
