Recently, the Calcutta High Court has strongly criticised a trial court for its ex parte dismissal of a divorce petition filed by a husband on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. The Division Bench comprising Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharya and Justice Uday Kumar passed the order on May 22, 2025, allowing the appeal and granting divorce to the appellant-husband.
The appellant-husband had instituted a suit for divorce in 2015, alleging cruelty and desertion by his wife. The trial court, however, dismissed the suit ex parte by a judgment and decree passed in February 2018. The husband thereafter approached the High Court in appeal.
It was noted by the High Court that although the respondent-wife had filed a written statement, she neither adduced any evidence nor cross-examined the appellant-husband. The trial court proceeded to decide the matter without the benefit of contesting evidence from the respondent’s side.
Upon examining the record, the Division Bench expressed serious concern over the manner in which the trial court handled the matter. The Bench observed that “even on a cursory perusal of the impugned judgment that the learned judge proceeded entirely on a tangential perception of his own, without adverting at all to the materials on record.”
The Court further noted that the trial court “overlooked the fact that the wife (respondent) did not adduce any evidence of her own despite having filed a written statement and also did not cross-examine the husband.”
The High Court remarked on the broader implications of such adjudication, stating that it was “just stopping short of making any serious adverse comment against the learned trial court judge, merely because such a comment could have an adverse effect on the judge's service career.”
Nonetheless, the Bench issued a clear caution to the judicial officer, stating, “the division bench expects that the learned trial judge concerned shall, in future, be aware of copy-pasting his previous judgments and going on his tangential curve of wishful imagination instead of adverting to the facts and materials on record in the particular case before him.”
The Court further warned that if any future instance of such an act on the part of the learned trial judge is noticed, the same may be directed to enter into his service book.
In view of the lack of evidence from the respondent-wife and the uncontroverted testimony of the appellant-husband, the High Court granted a decree of divorce to the husband on the ground of cruelty.
Source Link
Picture Source :
