Accusing Husband Of Extra-Marital Affair, Insulting Him In Front Of Friends Is Cruelty: Bombay High Court

The conduct of a wife refusing to have a physical relationship with her husband and accusing him of having an extra-marital affair, while insulting him in front of his friends, will amount to cruelty to the husband, the Bombay High Court held on Thursday. 

A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Dr Neela Gokhale also said that the wife insulting the husband in front of his friends and ill-treating his employees will cause mental agony to the husband. 

"The husband is a part of his family's business. The unrebutted evidence pertaining to the wife's behaviour with his employees is sure to cause agony to him. Similarly, humiliating him in front of his friends is also 'cruelty' to him. Moreover, apathetic and indifferent behaviour with his specially abled sister is also sure to cause pain to him and his family members. Refusal to have a physical relationship and making allegations of extra-marital relations is also cruelty by the wife," the judges held.

The bench was hearing an appeal filed by a wife challenging a November 28, 2019 judgment passed by a Family Court in Pune, by which the court granted a decree of divorce on a plea filed by the husband and dismissed the plea by the wife, who sought restitution of conjugal rights. 

The couple married on December 12, 2013 and got separated within a year i.e. on December 14, 2014. The parties initially in April 2015 filed a mutual consent divorce, however, in July 2015, the wife alleged that she was forced to file the said plea and therefore withdrew her consent. She subsequently lodged a complaint against the husband and his family members, with the local police.

The husband accused the wife of subjecting him to cruelty by humiliating him in front of his friends, barging into his office and speaking rudely with his employees, refusing to maintain physical relations for the first four months of their marriage, calling their anniversary day as the day of her failure etc.

The judges noted that the husband even tried to save the marriage by leaving his family house and living in a rented flat along with the wife but she did not turn up. 

"The marriage has broken without any possibility of being mended is quite clear even from the fact of the parties filing a mutual consent divorce petition as early as in 2015. It is also an admitted fact that the husband made an attempt to work on their relationship by moving out of his family home to a rented flat. He invited the wife to live there and gave her the key to the said flat. Despite this, she did not show up at the new flat. This evidence of the husband is also unchallenged, further refuting the assertion of the wife regarding him deserting her," the judges said. 

In their order, the bench described the instant case as an "unfortunate" one, where despite the parties undergoing mediation innumerable times, the matter was not resolved. The judges noted that even the coordinate benches, which heard the case before, tried to help the parties but there was no positive outcome of the same. 

"Matrimonial proceedings between the parties commenced in the year 2015 before the Family Court, Pune and they continued to meander before reaching this Court by way of this Appeal. In an endeavour to put an end to prolonged agony of the parties and as a penultimate attempt to resolve their disputes, we placed the matter in chambers. We held marathon sessions, to bring the parties to an amicable settlement, but regrettably, we were not able to break the deadlock between the parties. This has brought upon us the duty to decide the fate of the matrimonial tie between the parties," the bench explained. 

Further, the judges added, "For more than a decade, the parties have been living separately. The marriage does not survive any longer and the relationship is terminated and confirmed as such legally as well, by the Family Court. This appeal simply continues the status quo awaiting an order of this Court."

With these observations, the bench upheld the Family Court judgment and dismissed the wife's appeal. 

Appearance:

Advocates Usha Tanna, Hemal Ganatra and Rushda Patel appeared for the Wife.

Advocates Vikramaditya Deshmukh, MS Khadilkar, Chinmay Page and Ashutosh Pawar represented the Husband. 

Case Title: PAB vs ARB (Family Court Appeal 53 of 2021)

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment