'Doubting husband's character, making baseless allegations of extra marital affair before his colleagues amount to cruelty': Madras High Court

The Madras High Court recently granted divorce to a husband on ground of cruelty by his wife. Court held that the act of his wife suspecting his character, making allegations of an extramarital affair in the presence of his colleagues, and then filing a complaint against him without submitting any evidence amounted to mental cruelty within the meaning of Section 13(1)(ia) of Hindu Marriage Act.

The bench of Justice V.M Velumani and Justice S Sounthar pointed out that the wife went to her husband's workplace, a college, and created a scene there by connecting him with other female teaching staff in the presence of other staff members and students. "This act of respondent (wife) would certainly cause serious, irreparable injury to the image of the appellant in the minds of his colleagues and students," Court opined.

Court further highlighted that the wife herself had admitted in her pleadings, as well as, oral evidence that she had given a police complaint before All Women Police Station, connecting her husband with other women employees of the college in which he was working without specifically naming anybody.

Court observed that a careful reading of the oral testimony of the wife made it clear that she assumed illegal intimacy only because her husband used to talk with his female colleagues over the cell phone. "From the facts culled out above, there is no difficulty for us to come to the conclusion, the doubt created in the mind of respondent (wife) is nothing but an assumption without any reasonable basis," Court said. 

Relying upon a plethora of judgments including the decision in K.Srinivas Rao v. D.A.Deepa, wherein the Apex Court had observed that "...........Making unfounded indecent defamatory allegations against the spouse or his or her relatives in the pleadings, filing of complaints or issuing notices or news items which may have adverse impact on the business prospect or the job of the spouse and filing repeated false complaints and cases in the Court against the spouse would, in the facts of a case, amount to causing mental cruelty to the other spouse", Court held,

"We have no hesitation in holding that in the present case, the respondent /wife caused mental cruelty to husband by suspecting his character and making false allegations of extra marital affair in the presence of his colleagues and students and also before the police."

Court was dealing with an appeal moved by the husband against the Family Court order whereby his plea for divorce on the ground of cruelty was rejected. However, the wife had contended that the husband had not given any specific date on which she allegedly visited his workplace and created a scene there, therefore, the evidence with regard to that said fact could not be accepted. 

She had also claimed that her intention was to only to live with her husband and she preferred a complaint only with the good intention of seeking reunion, hence the same could not be termed as causing mental cruelty.

However, the Court pointed out that when the wife was examined as a witness, she admitted that at the time of separation, she removed her thali chain (Sacred chain worn by wife as a token of having married).

Stressing that the act of removing thali chain had its own significance, Court opined that it showed that the parties had no intention to continue the marital relationship.

In light of the above, Court set aside the Family Court order, allowed the husband's appeal and granted him divorce dissolving the marriage. 

Case Title:C Sivakumar vs A Srividhya