Unfortunate That Wife Is Granted Alimony Even After Husband Is Convicted In Cruelty Case Filed By Her: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has observed that it is unfortunate that the wife is granted maintenance despite the fact that the husband and his family is convicted for cruelty on her complaint. It was stated the Courts must consider all the aspects before granting alimony.

These observations were made while allowing the divorce plea filed by the husband against wife on grounds of cruelty under Hindu Marriage Act.

Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Sudeepti Sharma said, "in recent times, we have observed that in matrimonial matters, whether the appeal is filed by the husband or the wife, wives are often trying to exploit the situation by extorting money from the husband in exchange for the relief sought by him. In many cases, it is evident from the pleadings and proven through documentary records that wives have lodged FIRs against the husband and his family members, leading to their conviction."

"Taking it be cruelty, if the husband files a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for the grant of decree of divorce, it is normally a wife who files the applications for maintenance under different statutes, i.e. under Sections 24 and 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 18 of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Sections 20 and 22 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005", the Court said.

The Court observed further that despite the fact that she lodged an FIR against the husband and his family members and they were to face trial and spend the period of conviction in jail, the wife wanted a reward for the same by filing such kind of application.

"And it is very unfortunate that she is also granted the same. Now it is high time and the need of the society that such type of exploitation and extortion should be stopped," the Court remarked.

It added further that "justice demands that while dealing with the matrimonial matters and while granting permanent alimony, every aspect of the case should be taken into consideration which includes behaviour, conduct and the level of allegations made by each party."

The Court was hearing an appeal against the order of a family court which dismissed the divorce plea of a husband on the ground of cruelty under Section 13 (1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

The husband who was a judge of a District Court had levelled various allegations stating that it amounts to cruelty. He submitted that the wife moved a complaint before the Chief Justice of the Punjab & Haryana High Court alleging that he has misused his official position to harass her. However, the Family Court rejected the contention observing that the complaint was filed after filing the divorce plea.

The Family Court concluded that the husband failed to prove cruelty by his wife and in fact he had inflicted cruelty on her.

After hearing the submissions and examining the records, the Court said, "The conduct and behaviour of both the parties against each other throughout the litigation as per the record shows the intensity of bitterness in their relationship."

"While deciding this issue, normally, we have seen that the Courts below after appreciating the evidence decide this particular issue on the ground that the petitioner failed to prove the allegations or was able to prove the allegation of cruelty against the respondent. In the present case, this issue has been decided against the appellant-husband on the ground that he failed to prove the cruelty by the respondent-wife," the Court said.

It added that "Instead, the family Court observed that it was the appellant-husband who subjected the respondent-wife to cruelty. Whether it is the appellant- husband or the respondent-wife, one party is facing cruelty at the hands of other party. Ultimately, the Courts cannot allow a party suffering cruelty to continue enduring it."

The bench noted that the wife went to the extent of ruining the career of the appellant by making complaints against the appellant-husband, who is a judicial officer, to the Chief Justice of the High Court.

 The Court said that "cruelty can be inflicted by either party. Ultimately, the Courts must not compel one party to endure the cruelty of the other on a continuous basis."

Stating that the relationship between husband and wife is one of life partners, and such a relationship cannot be sustained if one partner is subjected to cruelty throughout their life, the Court said the judgment passed by the Family Court, "is bad in the eyes of the law."

Perusing the allegations of cruelty levelled by both the parties, the Court added, "it would not be in the interest of both the parties as well as the daughter born out the wedlock to allow the parties to live together."

Furthermore, the bench observed that "under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, certain grounds are specified for granting a decree of divorce. However, regardless of whether these grounds are proven, once parties are involved in matrimonial disputes, there are often allegations and counter-allegations. These cases cannot be treated in the same way as other civil or criminal matters."

With respect to permanent alimony, the bench said that as the husband offered Rs.30 lakhs as a one-time final alimony, the same was directed to be deposited in the wife's account in 6 months.

Consequently, the appeal filed by the husband against the impugned order dismissing the divorce plea was allowed.

Title: XXXX v. XXXX

 Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chopra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Brahmjot Singh Nahar, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Sumeet Mahajan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Saksham Mahajan, Advocate

Ms. Rabani Attri, Advocate, Ms. Shruti Singla, Advocate for the respondent.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 240