False Criminal Prosecution By Wife May Create Reasonable Apprehension Regarding Personal/ Family Safety, Constitutes Cruelty: Allahabad HC
The Allahabad High Court has held that false criminal prosecution case by wife against the husband and his family may create reasonable apprehension in mind of the husband regarding the safety of his family and himself if he were to stay in the matrimonial relationship.
It was held that such false criminal prosecution is sufficient to constitute cruelty under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Parties got married in 2002 and a son was born to them. Respondent alleged that the appellant-wife had deserted him in 2006 and subsequently, he instituted divorce proceedings. In 2011, he amended his plaint to add cruelty as a ground of divorce as false criminal cases had been lodged by the appellant against the respondent and his family members for, inter alia, demand of dowry. On such false allegations, his family members were arrested and later granted bail.
The Court observed that the appellant-wife had lodged the FIR regarding demand of dowry after 6 years of marriage and after filing of the divorce petition by the husband. The parents and respondent were exonerated as the appellant could not support her allegation with evidence and also had turned hostile. Accordingly, the Court held that cruelty was proven.
Challenging the decree of divorce granted by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Kanpur Nagar, counsel for appellant pleaded that the criminal cases were filed due to the cruelty/ bad behaviour faced by the appellant in her matrimonial life. However, the Court observed that such allegations were not proved.
It was further argued that the appellant had turned hostile in the criminal proceedings to revive her matrimonial relationship with her husband. Though the appellant claimed that there was settlement/ compromise between the parties, no such document was brought on record before the Court.
The Court observed that even though the parties may refer to each other's parents as in-laws, once the arrest of the parents and allegations against them have been found to be false, strict proof of cruelty may not be demanded.
It was held that if the demand of dowry was proved, then it would have been a different case. However, since the allegations were false and had affected the reputation of the respondent and his family, the Court observed that the respondent was meted out cruel behaviour and may not want to cohabit with the appellant due to fear of the same being repeated in future.
The bench comprising of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Donadi Ramesh held that
“divorce sought being a civil proceeding, everything apart, its institution may never have offered the respondent spouse (in that proceeding) motivation to get even with her spouse-by lodging a false criminal case. That act committed by the appellant led to loss of reputation and standing of the respondent and his family, in his society. Having suffered that, the respondent cannot be expected to cope with that and revive his matrimonial relations.”
Observing that both parties were well educate, the Court held that respondent-husband suffered loss of reputation due to false criminal prosecution by the appellant-wife and thus, would be exposed to the risk of same in future.
Accordingly, the Court upheld the decree of divorce.
Case Title: Smt. Tripti Singh v. Ajat Shatru [FIRST APPEAL No. - 251 of 2013]