The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that a husband’s unjustified relationship outside marriage amounts to cruelty towards his wife. The Court dismissed his appeal for divorce citing his own admissions.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana High Court said that if a husband has an unexplained relationship with another woman outside his marriage, it will be treated as cruelty towards his wife.
A bench made up of Justice Sudhir Singh and Justice Sukhvinder Kaur was hearing a case where the husband had asked for divorce because his wife had accused him of having illicit relations with another woman.
The Court pointed out that the husband had himself admitted that he knew the woman and had travelled with her many times by both air and train.
The Court said,
“Though, the stand of the appellant-husband is that he had no illicit relations with said XXX, yet we find that maintaining relations with a lady outside the matrimonial alliance that too without any justified explanation, certainly amounts to cruelty and rather, the said fact is sufficient to cause ruptures in the matrimonial alliance of the parties.”
This decision came when the husband filed an appeal challenging the Family Court’s 2023 judgment, where he was denied divorce.
The husband and wife, who are Hindus, got married in 2011 and have one child together. The husband claimed that his wife used to treat him and his family members very cruelly. He also said that the wife’s allegations of him having illicit relations with another woman had badly affected their marriage.
On the other side, the wife explained that once she had seen her husband with another woman in a park. When she asked her husband about it, he told her that the woman worked in his company and that he would marry her.
The Court further observed that, according to the findings of the Family Court, there was a compact disc (CD) which showed the husband coming out of a flat with a woman. It was also noted that the husband had even registered a company in the name of that woman and himself.
The husband had argued that there was no solid proof against him. But the High Court firmly rejected this argument and said,
“It has been admitted by the appellant (husband) that he had acquaintance with said XXX for a long time and that he had been travelling with her by air and train several times and he had even visited Goa with her. In our opinion, the admission of the appellant-husband regarding his relations with said XXX coupled with the position indicated in Ex.DA clearly shows that it was the appellant-husband, who had been the cause of disturbance in the matrimonial alliance of the parties.”
Because of this, the Court decided that the husband’s own behavior showed he was at fault, and therefore, he did not deserve any relief. His appeal for divorce was dismissed.
The Court concluded by saying,
“We are conscious of the fact that parties have been residing separately since 2018, but it must be borne in mind that the instant case is not a fit case, where any indulgence can be granted to the appellant-husband, due to long separation, in view of the acts and conduct of the appellant-husband.”
Advocate Balraj Gujjar appeared for the husband, and Advocate RK Dhankar represented the wife in this case.
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Cruelty to Wife
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
