The Delhi High Court on Wednesday has provided clarity on what constitutes cruelty within a marriage, offering a fresh perspective on traditional marital roles and responsibilities. The court’s ruling came during the hearing of an appeal against a family court’s decision, which had previously denied a man’s request for divorce on the grounds of alleged cruelty by his wife.
Division of Marital Responsibilities
The division bench, consisting of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, addressed the contentious issue of household chores within the marital setting. The judges stated,
“Asking a married woman to do household chores cannot be equated to the work of a housekeeper because it would be counted as her love and affection for her family.”
This observation underscores the court’s stance that the expectation for a wife to manage household duties does not amount to cruelty.
The court elaborated on the dynamics of marital responsibilities, noting,
“In certain strata, the husband takes over the financial obligations and the wife accepts household responsibility. Such is the present case. Even if the appellant expected the respondent to do household chores, it cannot be termed as cruelty.”
This clarification aims to balance traditional roles with modern marital expectations, emphasizing shared responsibilities and mutual respect.
The Issue of Separation from the Family
The case also delved into the sensitive issue of a wife urging her husband to live separately from his family. The appellant, a CISF member, expressed distress over his wife’s insistence on living apart from his parents and her alleged failure to contribute to household chores. The court found that compelling a husband to sever ties with his family constitutes cruelty, referencing the Supreme Court judgment in “Narendra vs. K. Meena,” which states, “asking a son to separate from his family amounts to cruelty.”
Justice Suresh Kumar Kait highlighted the cultural expectations for Hindu sons, remarking,
“It is not ‘desirable’ in Hindu culture for the son to get separated from his family after marriage.”
This reflects the court’s acknowledgment of the societal and familial bonds that often play a crucial role in Indian marriages.
Also Read- Bloomberg Challenges Delhi High Court’s Order To Remove Zee Article (lawchakra.in)
The Verdict and Its Implications
The Delhi High Court ultimately granted the man a divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, citing the wife’s unwillingness to live in a joint family and her repeated absences from the matrimonial home as key factors. The court noted,
“To nurture the matrimonial bond, it is of high significance that parties live together and avoid leaving each other’s company frequently.”
This ruling not only sheds light on what constitutes marital cruelty but also emphasizes the importance of cohabitation and shared life goals in a marriage. While the court dismissed the notion that expecting household chores from a wife amounts to cruelty, it reaffirmed the significance of mutual respect, understanding, and the willingness to live together as fundamental to the marital bond.
The Delhi High Court’s judgment is a significant step in defining the boundaries of marital responsibilities and cruelty. It underscores the need for a balanced approach to marital duties and the importance of maintaining familial relationships, setting a precedent for future cases involving similar disputes.
Also read- ADVOCATE ASSAULTED | Patna HC Orders SIT Following Violent Crime (lawchakra.in)