Husband's Unexplained Relationship Outside Marriage Amounts To Cruelty, Sufficient To Rupture Marriage: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that husband's unexplained relationship with another woman amounts to cruelty and that is sufficient to rupture marriage.

Justice Sudhir Singh and Justice Sukhvinder Kaur observed, “Though, the stand of the appellant-husband is that he had no illicit relations with said (lady), yet we find that maintaining relations with a lady outside the matrimonial alliance that too without any justified explanation, certainly amounts to cruelty and rather, the said fact is sufficient to cause ruptures in the matrimonial alliance of the parties.”

The Court was hearing plea filed by the husband challenging the order of the family Court wherein his divorce plea was rejected.

The couple had married in 2011 under Hindu Marriage Act. The husband alleged that the wife would treat him and his family with utmost cruelty and the allegations of illicit relations had caused a dent in their marriage.

On the other hand, the wife submitted that she had once seen her husband with a woman and when she questioned him, he told that she was serving in his company and would marry her.

After hearing the submissions, speaking for the bench Justice Singh noted that husband had admitted his acquaintance with the woman and that he had been travelling with her several times.

"It has been admitted by the appellant (husband) that he had acquaintance with said XXX for a long time and that he had been travelling with her by air and train several times and he had even visited Goa with her. In our opinion, the admission of the appellant-husband regarding his relations with said XXX coupled with the position indicated in Ex. DA clearly shows that it was the appellant-husband, who had been the cause of disturbance in the matrimonial alliance of the parties,"said the Court.

While noting that couple was living separately since 2018, the bench opined that it is not a fit case to grant divorce on the basis of long separation.

Consequently, the Court rejected husband's plea seeking divorce and said “We are conscious of the fact that parties have been residing separately since 2018, but it must be borne in mind that the instant case is not a fit case, where any indulgence can be granted to the appellant-husband, due to long separation, in view of the acts and conduct of the appellant-husband.”

Title: XXX v. XXX

Mr. Balraj Gujjar, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. R.K. Dhankar, Advocate for the respondent.