Vishal Singh v.s Priya @ Pihu and ANR (12.06.2020)
(The court declared that adultery cannot be said to have taken place before marriage and reinstated the grounds of mental cruelty)
Bench-
- Honourable Ms Justice Hima Kohli and
- Honourable Ms. Justice Asha Menon
Issue-
Does the new bride's conduct of being in her room or not doing household chores amount to cruelty? Can a relationship before marriage be termed adulterous?
Facts
- The appellant and the respondent were married on 12.11.2012 in accordance with the Hindu rites and rituals.
- The marriage was consummated soon after the marriage without any children.
- According to the appellant, who filed a divorce appeal in the Family Court initially, said that the respondent(wife) did not show a positive attitude after marriage and accused her of being involved in a relationship with the brother of her brother-in-law.
- The respondent contended that the appellant-accused her in order to hide his own wrongs which included torture for dowry.
Appellant's Contentions
1. The appellant said that the respondent did not show interest in the marriage by not engaging in the marriage ceremonies and not helping in the household chores soon after marriage.
2. He also contended that the respondent was in a relationship with the brother of her brother-in-law after marriage Section 13(1)(i) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
3. The appellant made allegations based on the following instances:
- Respondent was "rude" and "cruel" immediately after the marriage;
- Respondent picked up quarrels with every family member on trivial matters;
- Respondent refused to have any physical relations with him immediately after the marriage;
- Respondent locked herself in the room at the time of muh dikhai ceremony;
- Respondent looked nervous and unhappy at the marriage reception on 1.12.2012;
- Respondent kept herself to her room, showing a disinclination to do any household work or cook food.
Respondent's contentions
1. The respondent opposed the appeal for divorce saying that the husband was trying to hide his own wrongs.
2. The respondent clearly mentioned that she had disclosed of her previous affair with Respondent No. 2, before marriage and after long discussions the marriage was decided.
3. She also stated that even after an expenditure of Rs.13 lakhs on the marriage, the husband's family would torture her to bring dowry and threatened to kill her. After one previous attempt, the appellant's family members tried to suffocate her on 23.05.2013 and considering her to be dead, the appellant disposed off her body at a village near her natal home, after which she had also lodged an F.I.R. under Sections 498-A/307/504/506 of the IPC.
4. She completely denied the complaints of adultery and being in a live-in relationship with Respondent No.2 even before marriage.
Judgement
After findings by the Court and a failure of the appellant to prove the claims of adultery by the respondent, and the fact that she was in a relationship before marriage is meaningless. The Court held that no such act of the respondent leads to a belief that she had treated the appellant/husband with cruelty The Court also stated the judgement in the V. Bhagat vs. Mrs D. Bhagat, AIR 1994 SC 710 which talked about what amounted to cruelty. Thus, the plea was dismissed along with the pending application.
