The Jharkhand High Court held that a wife compelled to leave her matrimonial home due to cruelty and torture cannot be treated as a deserter, setting aside the Family Court’s divorce decree for perversity and improper appreciation of evidence.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
RANCHI: The Jharkhand High Court has set aside a decree of divorce granted by the Family Court, Jamshedpur, holding that the lower court’s judgment suffered from “perversity” due to improper appreciation of evidence relating to cruelty and desertion under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Arun Kumar Rai ruled that a wife compelled to leave the matrimonial home due to torture cannot be said to have deserted her husband, reaffirming settled principles of matrimonial law.
Case Background
The appeal was filed by the wife against the judgment dated October 7, 2021, passed in Original Suit No. 548 of 2015, whereby the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamshedpur, dissolved the marriage under Section 13(1)(i)(a) and 13(1)(i)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, citing cruelty and desertion.
The parties were married on April 27, 2009, at Jamshedpur. The respondent-husband, a practicing advocate, has a physical deformity in his right hand and left leg. The husband alleged that the wife was unhappy with his deformity, refused cohabitation, attempted suicide by consuming mosquito repellent, demanded a separate house, and finally left the matrimonial home in September 2011 with their minor daughter.
The wife, however, denied these allegations and claimed that she was subjected to cruelty and harassment for dowry, forcibly made to consume mosquito repellent, and subsequently driven out of her matrimonial home. She asserted that despite giving birth to a female child on November 10, 2010, neither the husband nor his family visited or provided financial support. She maintained her willingness to resume cohabitation.
Arguments Before the High Court
Appellant-Wife
Counsel for the wife, Mr. Rahul Kumar, contended that:
- The Family Court failed to appreciate that the wife was forced to leave due to torture, not desertion.
- The husband failed to establish cruelty through cogent evidence.
- The pendency of a criminal case under Section 498A IPC cannot, by itself, amount to cruelty.
ALSO READ: Jharkhand High Court: “Mental Illness Alone Not Enough for Divorce Without Proof”
Respondent-Husband
Counsel for the husband, Mr. Anurag Kashyap, supported the Family Court’s findings, arguing that:
- The wife deserted the husband in 2011 without reasonable cause.
- Her conduct amounted to mental cruelty.
High Court’s Analysis and Observations
The High Court carefully examined the oral and documentary evidence and found the Family Court’s findings to be perverse, as they were either unsupported by evidence or ignored material facts on record.
The Court noted that the husband’s allegation regarding the wife’s suicide attempt was not corroborated by any independent or consistent evidence. Importantly, the alleged incident was never reported to the police. The Bench observed:
“The factum of attempt to commit suicide by the appellant/wife has not been corroborated… and it is admitted that the said incident has not been reported by the respondent or his family members.”
The Court further took serious note of the husband’s neglect of the child. During cross-examination, the husband admitted that he did not know his daughter’s date of birth, while his father did not even know the child’s name. The Bench remarked:
“It is evident that after birth of the baby child no expenses were incurred by the respondent/husband or his family members… which shows complete neglect.”
The Court concluded that the wife had demonstrated her willingness to live with the husband, whereas cruelty was meted out by the husband and his family.
Relying on landmark Supreme Court judgments, including Lachman Utamchand Kirpalani v. Meena (1964) and Debananda Tamuli v. Kakumoni Kataky (2022), the High Court reiterated that desertion requires:
- Factum of separation, and
- Animus deserendi (intention to permanently abandon),
Both without reasonable cause.
The Court categorically held:
“If the wife leaves the matrimonial home due to torture and cruelty, such separation will not amount to desertion.”
The Bench found that the wife was compelled to leave due to dowry-related harassment, and the husband refused to take her back, thereby making him the actual deserter.
“It is the respondent-husband who deserted the appellant-wife and compelled her to live in her maike.”
The High Court ruled that the Family Court’s judgment was legally unsustainable and not based on a proper appreciation of the evidence.
“The judgment dated 07.10.2021 and the decree dated 01.11.2021… are quashed and set aside.”
Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, and the decree of divorce was annulled.
Case Title:
Rambha Kumari Versus Rajesh Choudhary
First Appeal No.65 of 2021
READ ORDER
Click Here to Read More Reports On Mental Cruelty