Cruelty | Intention Not Necessary If Act Complained Of Bad Enough And Per Se Unlawful: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Divorce Decree
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has ruled that levelling baseless accusations of infidelity against a spouse can be grounds for divorce, even if unintentional.A bench comprising Justices Vivek Singh Thakur and Sandeep Sharma has clarified that cruelty can exist even without deliberate or willful intent and the absence of intention shouldn't negate relief for the aggrieved spouse if the...
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has ruled that levelling baseless accusations of infidelity against a spouse can be grounds for divorce, even if unintentional.
A bench comprising Justices Vivek Singh Thakur and Sandeep Sharma has clarified that cruelty can exist even without deliberate or willful intent and the absence of intention shouldn't negate relief for the aggrieved spouse if the act reasonably constitutes cruelty.
Upholding a decree of divorce granted in favour of the respondent-husband by a Family Court on the ground of cruelty the court observed,
“There may be cases where the conduct complained of itself is bad enough and per se unlawful or illegal. Then the impact or the injurious effect on the other spouse needs not be enquired into or considered. In such like cases, the cruelty will be established if the conduct itself is proved or admitted”.
Background:
The case centred on the marital discord between the parties, whose union was formalised on May 10, 2005. The respondent husband sought divorce under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, alleging cruelty. The Family Court, in its ruling on August 14, 2019, granted the divorce, prompting the appellant-wife to approach the High Court.
The appellant-wife argued that the divorce petition did not align with the Hindu Marriage & Divorce (Himachal Pradesh) Rules 1982. She contended that the court erroneously granted the decree based on vague cruelty allegations. Additionally, she accused her husband of having illicit relations with another woman, asserting that the Family Court failed to properly assess the evidence.
Respondent-husband on he other hand asserted that the appellant-wife's accusations of adultery caused him significant harassment, mental stress, and humiliation.
Observations Of The Court:
The Court noted there was overwhelming evidence demonstrating that the appellant-wife had visited the office of the respondent-husband and levelled allegations of adultery in the presence of other officials, as a result of which, respondent-husband not only suffered humiliation but also mental trauma. It also noted that the appellant-wife had failed to substantiate her allegations.
Emphasizing that cruelty as contemplated under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, can be mental or physical and must go beyond the ordinary wear and tear of married life, the court found that the appellant-wife's serious and scandalous allegations of adultery amounted to a grave assault on the character, honor, reputation, and status of the respondent-husband, constituting mental cruelty.
“Leveling disgusting accusations of indecent familiarity with a person outside wedlock and allegations of extra marital relationship constitute grave assault on the character, honour, reputation, status of the spouse. Definitely such aspersions amount to worst form of insult and cruelty, which itself is sufficient to substantiate cruelty in law, warranting the claim of the respondent-husband being allowed”, the bench recorded.
In light of these considerations, the bench found no scope of interference with the impugned divorce decree and accordingly dismissed the appeal.
Case Title: KT Vs ST
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 2