Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Allahabad High Court recently observed that a wife’s refusal to cohabit and forcing her husband to live in a separate room constitutes cruelty.

The bench of Justices Rajan Roy and Subhash Vidyarthi said, "Cohabitation is an essential part of a matrimonial relationship and if the wife declines to cohabit with the husband by forcing him to live in a separate room, she deprives him of his conjugal rights, which will have an adverse impact on his mental and physical well being and which will amount to both physical and mental cruelty".

The court was dealing with an appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act by a man challenging the validity of a judgment and decree passed by the VI Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Lucknow under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The man's wife did not appear to oppose the appeal, therefore, it was decided ex-parte by the high court.

The couple got married in November 2016, but problems started just a few months later. The husband said his wife began to harass him, insult him in front of friends and family, and even threatened to harm herself if he entered her room. She also allegedly forced him to live in a separate room. These actions, according to the husband, made it impossible for him to continue living with her.

The husband tried to resolve the issues through mediation, but his wife refused to participate in any settlement. Although she appeared briefly in family court, she did not respond to his claims, and the case moved forward without her involvement.

The family court dismissed the husband’s divorce petition, questioning the credibility of the evidence he presented. It was particularly concerned that the husband's testimony came mainly from himself and his father, and it was not supported by more detailed evidence. The family court also noted that the husband had gone through a previous divorce, which made the judge question whether his claims in this case were reliable.

When the case was brought before the high court, it took a closer look at the evidence. The division bench found that the family court had made a mistake by dismissing the husband’s evidence simply because it was not challenged by the wife.

The high court pointed out that since the wife did not contest the claims or provide her side of the story, the husband’s evidence should have been given more weight.

It also clarified that in cases of cruelty, it is not always easy to provide direct proof, especially when the incidents happen within the privacy of a marriage.

The division bench determined that the husband had provided enough evidence to show that his wife’s behavior was cruel and that he was justified in seeking a divorce.

The bench, therefore, decided to grant the divorce, overturning the family court’s earlier decision.

Case Title: xxx v. yyy