In a detailed and strongly-worded judgment, the Orissa High Court has upheld a divorce decree granted to a man whose wife had filed over 45 FIRs and multiple legal complaints against him and his family. The Court found this conduct amounted to “mental cruelty,” rendering the marital relationship irretrievably broken.
The Division Bench of Justice Chittaranjan Dash and Justice B.P. Routray, in MATA Nos. 315 and 316 of 2023, dismissed the wife’s appeal challenging a 2023 judgment by the Family Court, Cuttack, which had granted divorce to the husband and rejected her plea for restitution of conjugal rights.
Background
The couple married on May 11, 2003, and initially lived together in Cuttack, later moving to Bhubaneswar, Bangalore, the USA, and Japan. The marriage quickly deteriorated, leading to years of acrimony and prolonged litigation.
The husband (respondent) filed for divorce in C.P. No. 153/2009, citing mental cruelty, while the wife (appellant) filed C.P. No. 531/2009 seeking restitution of conjugal rights. The Family Court ruled in favor of the husband, also awarding Rs. 63 lakh in permanent alimony to the wife.
Allegations and Legal Issues
The husband, represented by Senior Advocate Mr. Bibekananda Bhuyan along with Mr. S.S. Bhuyan, alleged that the wife:
- Filed over 45 FIRs and numerous cases across different jurisdictions against him and his family;
- Physically assaulted him on multiple occasions, including in Dallas (USA), causing a scalp injury;
- Forcibly ousted his elderly parents from their home in Jagatsinghpur by arriving with local goons;
- Threatened suicide multiple times to emotionally manipulate him;
- Created disruptions at his workplaces in India and Thailand, forcing him to resign from TCS in 2024 due to sustained harassment.
These allegations were supported by medical records, police reports from India and Thailand, and sworn testimonies from neighbors and relatives.
The wife’s counsel, Mr. A.P. Bose, argued that the cases were a lawful exercise of her rights and reflected her attempts to seek justice. He further contended that the Family Court prematurely passed the decree despite pending mediation before the High Court and the Supreme Court.
Key Observations by the High Court
The High Court drew from landmark Supreme Court rulings in K. Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa and Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh, reiterating that:
“Filing repeated false complaints and cases, in the facts of a case, amounts to mental cruelty.”
“When one partner resorts to repeated threats of suicide or violence, the very foundation of this sacred bond is shattered.”
The Court held that the wife’s “calculated pattern of vexatious litigation,” combined with physical aggression, financial manipulation, and emotional abuse, had made cohabitation “not only impossible but emotionally damaging.”
It noted that while filing legal cases is a right, the volume, content, and context of her complaints clearly showed a deliberate misuse of legal processes to inflict mental agony.
Other Significant Findings
- The wife’s petition for restitution of conjugal rights was viewed as a tactical response rather than a genuine attempt at reconciliation.
- The husband’s resignation email from TCS, citing workplace harassment due to the wife’s conduct, was accepted as evidence of mental cruelty.
- Her father’s unauthorized letting out of the matrimonial property and efforts to isolate the husband from his parents further proved coercive behavior.
On Alimony
The wife challenged the Rs. 63 lakh alimony award as inadequate. However, the Court found the amount “just and equitable,” considering the husband’s income, assets, and the wife’s educational qualifications (she had earned an M.Sc. from New York Institute of Technology during the marriage).
Final Verdict
Dismissing the appeal, the Bench ruled:
“The law cannot compel a person to endure a marriage that has become a source of suffering and torment.”
It affirmed that the Family Court’s decision was legally sound, factually substantiated, and justified by overwhelming evidence of cruelty.
