Mere Friendship Between Husband & Colleague Cannot Be Perceived As Illicit Relationship: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that the mere friendship between a husband and his office colleague cannot be misconstrued as an illicit sexual relationship in the absence of any material to prove otherwise.

A division bench of Justices Sabyasachi Bhattacharya and Uday Kumar held:

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.

Such serious allegations themselves constitute cruelty, particularly read in the context of the marriage between the parties having irretrievably broken down for at least over a decade. Forcing the parties to live together in such acrimonious atmosphere between themselves, which is evident from the records, would be perpetrating cruelty on both of them, the Bench added.

The present appeal was filed against the dismissal of the appellant/husband's suit for divorce on the grounds of cruelty. The parties got married in 2007, but thereafter the relationship between the parties soured and the respondent/wife filed a complaint against the husband and his family members under Sections 498-A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

On March 22, 2010, however, the respondent/wife wrote to the O.C. Thakurpukur Police Station not to proceed with the criminal case and accordingly, the police filed an FRT, dropping the criminal complaint.

In September, 2012, the respondent/wife returned to her matrimonial home and the parties resided together, culminating in the birth of a daughter on July 15, 2014 from the wedlock. Thereafter the relationship between the parties worsened again and on December 13, 2017, a divorce suit was filed by the appellant/husband, which, being dismissed on contest, the present appeal has been preferred.

Counsel for the appellant argued that several allegations of cruelty were made in the plaint, regarding torture meted out by the respondent/wife against the husband and his family members, particularly his mother. However, the main submissions regarding cruelty made by the appellant/husband revolve around two factors – the filing of several criminal complaints against the appellant/husband and his family members before and during the pendency of the divorce suit and secondly, allegations of an illicit relationship between the appellant and one of his office colleagues.

It was submitted that the respondent/wife, on the one hand, gives out that she wishes to live with her husband and on the other has been instituting numerous frivolous criminal complaints and cases against her husband and/or his family members even during the pendency of the matrimonial suit.

It is, thus, submitted that, whether independently or in conjunction with the ground of cruelty, the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage between the present parties ought to be sufficient ground to dissolve the marriage.

Counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submitted that the marriage between the present parties cannot be said to have irretrievably broken down since the respondent/wife is eager to resume conjugal life with her husband. It is contended by the respondent that the mere filing of a criminal complaint is not tantamount to cruelty. 

It was argued that, in the instant case, there was a sufficient basis for the allegations of an illicit relationship of the husband with an office colleague in view of the husband having resided with her and the said lady having been involved with the husband during his Gallstone surgery. Further, the husband lives in a rented accommodation opposite the house of the said lady.

Upon hearing the counsel for the parties, the court concluded that in the present case, there was no material to suggest that the husband was having an illicit affair and that the wife's actions of filing frivolous criminal cases against him as well as making allegations of an illicit relationship without basis were tantamount to cruelty.

Thus the court granted the decree for divorce.

Case: X vs Y

Case No: FAT 28 of 2023

Click Here To Read/Download Order