The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court refused to delete a family court issue questioning whether a doctor’s wife sent kiss emojis to another man, in an ongoing divorce case alleging cruelty. The wife had challenged the issue and sought an additional question on the maintainability of the divorce petition, but the High Court declined to interfere.
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court declined to remove an issue related to kiss emojis that had been framed in a pending divorce case involving a doctor couple.
The husband approached the family court in Jammu seeking divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, citing cruelty. Among the issues framed by the family court was whether the wife had been caught sending kiss emojis to another man, who is also a doctor.
The wife moved the High Court challenging this and sought deletion of the “kiss emojis” question. She also requested that an additional issue be framed on whether the divorce petition was maintainable.
Justice Rahul Bharti, however, refused to intervene, holding that the husband would still be required to prove each allegation during the trial and that keeping the issue on record would not, by itself, prejudice the wife.
The Court further observed that if the husband failed to produce evidence to substantiate his claims, his petition would fail and the wife’s defence would be upheld.
At the same time, the judge noted that the family court may not have needed to frame a separate issue exclusively for the exchange of kiss emojis, since the allegation is part of the broader claim of cruelty and could have been addressed within that existing issue.
The judge also remarked that treating every individual allegation as a standalone issue could lead to an endless list of questions being framed in matrimonial disputes.
The couple married in May 2018 and have a daughter born in 2019. The husband filed for divorce in January 2025 on grounds of cruelty.
In September 2025, the family court framed issues covering the cruelty allegations, the alleged exchange of kiss emojis, an alleged threat to the husband’s life, and the wife’s claim that she was denied entry into the matrimonial home by her in-laws.
Rejecting the wife’s challenge, the High Court said that questions about the truth or correctness of the allegations can only be decided after evidence is produced during the trial.
While dismissing the petition, the Court clarified that the trial court may still consider the wife’s contention that some alleged acts were condoned by the husband and, if required, frame a separate issue on that point.