The court highlighted that the wife's false criminal accusations in 1997, made before any other legal proceedings were initiated by the husband, were the final blow to the trust in their marriage
The Allahabad High Court recently observed that no male or female spouse can be expected to continue in a marital relationship at the risk of malicious criminal prosecution as it dissolved the marriage between a couple.
The court noted that in the case at hand, the wife had lodged a criminal complaint against her husband and his family members, accusing them of dowry harassment. However, her brother’s testimony revealed that no such dowry demands had ever been made.
The court held the wife’s conduct extremely cruel for the purpose of Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 i.e. divorce. “Criminal prosecution certainly leads to loss of dignity and reputation, besides other consequences that may arise, if a person is arrested or tried for the offence alleged,” the court said.
The husband filed two appeals before the high court challenging the dismissal of his divorce application and decree for restitution of conjugal rights granted in favour of his wife by the courts below.
The parties had been married since April 29, 1992, and their marriage, according to the husband, was short-lived, with the wife allegedly deserting him in November 1995. Since then, they had lived separately for 29 years.
One of the key points of contention in the case was the wife’s filing of a criminal case in 1999 under Sections 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code, accusing the husband and his family of dowry harassment. The criminal case was filed after the husband instituted the divorce proceedings.
The husband alleged that the courts below completely misread the evidence as both grounds for divorce i.e. desertion and cruelty were made out in the case at hand. He alleged that his wife had left him voluntarily and without any explanation. He also claimed that during her brief stay, she used to ill-treat him and his family members.
The division bench of Justices Saumitra Dayal Singh and Donadi Ramesh noted that the records and submission made by the counsel for both sides revealed that the wife had deserted the company of the husband of her own free will without any instigation offered by the husband.
Additionally, the court highlighted that the wife’s false criminal accusations in 1997, made before any other legal proceedings were initiated by the husband, were the final blow to the trust in their marriage.
It said that the wife’s extremely cruel behaviour towards her husband and his family created a reasonable fear in his mind that living with her could be harmful or dangerous.
As a government employee, the husband faced serious risks due to these baseless allegations of dowry demands and cruelty, court said.
The high court opined that these aspects completely escaped the attention of the courts below and therefore, the decree for restitution of conjugal rights could not be sustained. Accordingly, it set aside the decree for the restitution of conjugal rights and dissolved the marriage.
On the issue of alimony, the court noted that the wife was a government teacher since 1997 and there are no children born to the parties, therefore, no maintenance was required to be paid to her.
