Unfounded Allegation On Character Of Spouse Is Cruelty, Can Be Grounds For Dissolution Of Marriage: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court recently allowed an appeal filed by a woman challenging the order of the trial court dismissing her petition seeking divorce and held that unfounded allegation on the character of a spouse causes mental cruelty and can be a ground for dissolution of marriage.

A division bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde allowed the appeal filed by the woman and said “The institution of marriage rests on the mutual trust, confidence, love and respect between the couple. When one spouse makes an allegation suspecting the character of the other and if that allegation is not substantiated, the Court has to hold that the allegation is unfounded. The unfounded allegation on the character of a spouse shakes the edifice of the institution of marriage. In such a situation, it would be extremely difficult for the spouse to live peacefully in matrimony.”

The couple had married On 31.03.2013. The petitioner completed her post-graduation in engineering after the marriage. The respondent was a partner in a partnership firm dealing with granite.

It was stated that three years after the marriage, the respondent started torturing the petitioner and suspected her character and used to check the call details on the petitioner's cell phone. The respondent used to physically assault the petitioner. The petitioner being unable to live with the respondent, started residing with her grandmother in Bengaluru, in 2017.

The husband denied all the allegations and contended that the petitioner had had a superiority complex ever since she completed her post-graduation in engineering. It was stated that the petitioner insisted him to stay with her maternal family and he could not accede to the demand of the petitioner as he had aged parents and his sister to maintain. He is ready to stay with the petitioner in his house at Tumakuru. He specifically denied the allegation that he suspected the fidelity of the petitioner.

The bench on going through the records noted that the petition was filed on the premise that the respondent used to suspect the character of the petitioner. Though this allegation is denied in the written statement, the suggestion in the cross-examination of the husband nullifies the very defence taken in the written statement denying the allegation of suspicious character made in the petition.

It said “It is evident that the allegation is levelled against the petitioner stating that she is having an affair with one person and is intending to marry him after obtaining divorce. Since the petitioner worked in Ramanagara for two years, the suggestion made in the cross examination referred to above assumes significant importance. The suggestion does not just link the name of a person with the petitioner but also makes an allegation that the petitioner is having an affair with the said person who was working in the same office when the petitioner was working in Ramanagar. And it is also suggested that the petitioner wanted to marry him. The aforementioned evidence in the cross examination would lead to the conclusion that the respondent used to suspect the character of the petitioner stands established.”

Then it held “This being the position, this Court is of the view that the Court has to accept the evidence of the petitioner who has stated that the conduct of the respondent has resulted in mental cruelty. Thus, the petitioner is justified in seeking a petition for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty.”

The court rejected the ground of desertion raised by the appellant. It said that this Court finds that the pleading is not sufficient to uphold the plea of desertion though the Court finds some justification in the act of the petitioner being away from the respondent.

However, it clarified that when a petition is filed seeking dissolution of marriage on the grounds of cruelty and desertion, the law does not mandate that both grounds are to be established to grant the decree for dissolution of marriage. Even if one of the grounds is established, that would be sufficient to grant a decree for dissolution of marriage.

Following this the court held “The allegation (suspecting fidelity) is unfounded and baseless. Apart from that, the allegation is reckless as well as scandalous. Having considered all the materials on record, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is able to establish the ground of cruelty. The Family Court has not considered the aforementioned evidence in proper perspective.”

Appearance: Advocate Vinaya Keerthy M for Appellant.

Advocate Anandeeshwara D R for Respondent.

Citation No: 2024 LiveLaw (Kar) 232

Case Title: ABC AND XYZ

Case No: MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2107 OF 2020

Click Here To Read/Download Order