In a significant judgment, the Allahabad High Court dissolved a marriage, stating that no spouse should be compelled to endure a matrimonial relationship under the threat of malicious criminal prosecution. The court observed that such circumstances constitute mental cruelty, making it untenable for a marriage to continue.
Background of the Case
The case involved two First Appeals (Nos. 480 of 2010 and 447 of 2010) heard by a division bench comprising Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Donadi Ramesh. The appeals arose from the orders dated July 23, 2010, passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Ballia, in Original Suit Nos. 57 of 2003 and 286 of 2002.
The appellant had initially filed a divorce petition on grounds of cruelty and desertion, which was dismissed by the trial court. The respondent had also filed a petition seeking restitution of conjugal rights, which was granted in her favor by the lower court. The appellant challenged both decisions in the High Court.
Key Legal Issues and Court Observations
1. Cruelty and Desertion as Grounds for Divorce:
The primary contention of the appellant, represented by counsel, was that the respondent had deserted him without justifiable cause and had exhibited cruel behavior towards him and his family. The couple had married in 1992 and cohabited for only two years. The appellant alleged that the respondent permanently deserted him in 1995 and had since refused to cohabit.
2. Malicious Criminal Prosecution:
Another critical issue raised by the appellant was the malicious criminal prosecution initiated by the respondent in 1999, under Sections 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The appellant argued that these charges were false and intended to coerce him into not seeking a divorce. The court noted that the brother of the respondent had testified that no demand for dowry was ever made by the appellant or his family, thus disproving the allegations.
3. Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage:
The court recognized the prolonged separation of 29 years and the lack of any possibility for reconciliation. It observed that the continuous threat of criminal prosecution had inflicted grave mental cruelty upon the appellant, making it impossible for the marriage to continue.
Decision of the Court
The court held that the conduct of the respondent in lodging false criminal proceedings against the appellant amounted to mental cruelty, justifying the dissolution of the marriage. It observed:
“No spouse, whether male or female, may be expected to continue in a matrimonial relationship at the risk of malicious criminal prosecution. 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 further stated that the desertion by the respondent without any justifiable reason since 1995, coupled with the malicious allegations, constituted grounds for the dissolution of the marriage under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, as amended by the U.P. Amendment.
Quoting the Court’s Observations
The bench, emphasizing the sanctity of a Hindu marriage, noted:
“A Hindu marriage is a sacrament and not just a social contract. Where one partner abandons the other without reason or just cause, the sacrament loses its soul and spirit, though it may continue to hold its external form and body. The death of the spirit and soul of a Hindu marriage may constitute cruelty to the spouse who may be thus left alone.”
The Allahabad High Court allowed both appeals, setting aside the orders of the lower court that had dismissed the divorce petition and granted restitution of conjugal rights. The court dissolved the marriage, citing both desertion and cruelty. It also noted that since the respondent was gainfully employed and there were no children from the marriage, no alimony was required.
The appellant was represented by counsels Samiran Chatterjee and S. Chatterjee, while the respondent was represented by counsel Kumar Sambhav.
