The Jharkhand High Court has upheld the dismissal of a husband’s divorce petition, ruling that unverified suspicions and generalized allegations of adultery do not constitute valid grounds for dissolving a marriage under Hindu law.
A division bench comprising Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava held that allegations of adultery require precise pleadings and credible evidence rather than mere conjecture. The judges noted that such accusations carry severe civil consequences and leave a lasting social stigma on the individual named as an alleged paramour.
In its July 23 order, the court observed that while the husband had amended his petition to accuse his wife of an illicit relationship, he failed to cite specific instances or present corroborative material. The bench characterized his claims as unsubstantiated assertions and personal surmises rather than established facts.
Dowry Allegations And Retaliatory Claims
In contrast, the High Court found the wife’s testimony regarding dowry harassment, neglect, and physical abuse to be consistent and supported by legal records. The bench noted that her decision to initiate criminal proceedings against her husband and his family added credibility to her account of being forced out of the matrimonial home.
The bench further pointed out that the husband’s allegations appeared retaliatory, coming after his wife lodged complaints with his employer and initiated legal action. Evaluating the evidence, the court concluded that the balance of probabilities supported the wife’s account of enduring cruelty and dowry demands.
Decade-Long Legal Battle
The dispute stems from a marriage solemnized according to Hindu rites on July 3, 1987. After nearly 15 years of marriage, the husband petitioned for divorce on the grounds of cruelty, later adding the charge of adultery. He claimed his wife frequently quarrelled, withheld marital relations, threatened suicide, and left the home without consent.
The wife denied all charges, stating that she was subjected to physical assault and deprived of food over additional dowry demands, eventually suffering a miscarriage. She subsequently filed criminal cases under Sections 498A and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. She also stated that despite her willingness to resume cohabitation, her husband contracted a second marriage while seeking a divorce.
Procedural Background
A family court initially granted the husband a divorce in 2011. However, the High Court set aside that decree in 2016 and remanded the matter for a fresh trial with instructions to record evidence anew.
Upon re-evaluating the matter, the family court dismissed the husband’s divorce petition in January 2019. The High Court’s latest ruling rejects the husband’s appeal against that 2019 dismissal, bringing the legal challenge to a close.
