Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

The Calcutta High Court has held that reckless allegations of an extra-marital affair with a colleague made by a wife against her husband constitute mental cruelty.

A division bench comprising Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Justice Uday Kumar, allowed the husband’s appeal for divorce on the grounds of cruelty, ruling that the marriage between the parties had broken down irretrievably due to the wife’s baseless allegations.

“Mere friendship between the husband and his office colleague and the closeness between such friends at the time of the husband‟s surgery (during which he was having constant conflict at home with the respondent/wife and was under the guillotine of a pending criminal case at the instance of the wife) being perceived to be an illicit sexual relationship between them by the wife is unacceptable and, in the context of non-corroboration by any independent witness, must be held to be baseless in the present context,” the court observed.

The case arose from an appeal filed by the husband/ petitioner against the family court’s decision denying him divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, on grounds of cruelty. The petitioner contended that his wife had persistently accused him of having an illicit relationship with a female colleague, despite the absence of any evidence. These allegations, made in the presence of relatives and colleagues, caused him severe mental trauma and social embarrassment. It was further argued that the wife had filed several criminal cases against the husband and his family members without any reasonable basis.

The family court, however, dismissed the husband’s plea, holding that marital disputes, including suspicions of infidelity, do not necessarily amount to cruelty. Aggrieved by this decision, the husband approached the High Court.

The High Court, noted that a string of criminal complaints, including that of dowry related torture and adultery, had been lodged by the respondent/wife against her husband and his family members. It stated: “the wife has failed to furnish any reasonable basis of the criminal complaints, which might have serious consequences, not only of a penal nature but also damaging the husband’s reputation in society beyond repair.”

The court also said, “the unsubstantiated allegation of illicit physical relationship of the husband with an office colleague and friend as well as numerous criminal complaints being lodged baselessly (without the accusations therein relating to dowry torture being pleaded or proved before the civil court), while in the same breath, the respondent/wife canvasses her wish to live together with the husband, tantamount to mental cruelty of such an order that the parties cannot reasonably be expected to live together and endure such agony throughout the rest of their lives.”

The court further found that the wife was using the criminal complaints as a tool to force the husband to return to her every time he goes away. “The wife has been consistently giving out that she wants to live with her husband but has been simultaneously filing criminal complaints one after the other, which could lead to serious consequences not only of a criminal nature but also tarnishing the image of the appellant/husband irreparably in society,” the court remarked.

The court concluded that the family court had failed to properly consider these crucial aspects while refusing to grant a divorce to the husband, finding that it was not justified to bind the parties forcibly to an “ever-irreconcilable and illusory bond.”

Resultantly, the court set aside the family court’s order and granted a decree of divorce, dissolving the marriage between the parties.

 

Cause Title: X v Y [F.A.T. No. 28 of 2023]

Appearance: For the appellant- Mr. Zohaib Rauf, Mr. Rajdeep Mantha, Mr. Barnamoy Basak; For the respondent- Mr. Kallol Basu, Mr. Nilanjan Pal