Court: Uttarakhand High Court
Bench: JUSTICE Rajiv Sharma, J. & Sharad Kumar Sharma
Satya Prakash Dhyani Vs. Pinki Devi Dhyani On 8 September 2017
Law Point:
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13(1)(ia) — Cruelty — Illicit relationship and physical involvement of respondent-wife — Allegation by appellant-husband against respondent-wife is not a trifle issue — Respondent-wife had pre-conceived notion of ruining matrimonial life of husband as allegation of appellant-husband having solemnised second marriage with another lady is not acceptable because ‘R’ was never produced by her to support her stand as witness — Looking to the conduct of wife and manner in which she conducted herself in matrimony is sufficient enough to show she has acted with cruelty, physical and mental, when she indulged herself in physical relation with other male other than her own husband — Marriage between parties is dissolved.
JUDGEMENT
The husband of the respondent, i.e. the appellant husband, who was married with respondent on 9.5.1997 as per the Hindu rites and rituals, had instituted proceedings under Section 13, for dissolving the marriage. The suit was instituted as Suit No. 322 of 2008.
2. Out of the wedlock and the relationship which the parties to the matrimony had a daughter named Preeti Dhyani was born on 11th December, 1998 and, thereafter, a second daughter was born, named Km. Ishika on 16th April, 2000. Both of them, at the time of intuition of the proceedings under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, were 11 years and 8 years of age respectively.
3. The contention of the appellant before the Court below was that since he being a member of Para Military Force and was working in the capacity of a Constable, had been posted in North Bengal and, due to his official engagement, he could not remain consistently with the respondent wife at her matrimonial house. This aggravated the attitude of the respondent wife and she started misbehaving with the appellant as well as the family members by using abusive languages and by torturous acts which though could not be defined by the words but could be experienced while living together, because sometimes actions and deeds are more treacherous than dialects. This was the case at hand.
4. The appellant’s case was that whenever, he used to return to his native place, after availing leave, the attitude of the respondent wife was placid and she never showed that much of concern and attachment to the appellant nor she used to discharge her matrimonial obligation, which normally a wife is expected to when husband returns home after long interval.
5. The basis of the suit was also that the husband used to accept that situation as created by the wife taking into consideration the fact that the same might have been consequence of the loneliness which she must have suffered due to the appellant’s incapacity to be with her always. His case was also that she denied to have any physical relationship with him which was the basis foundation of a matrimonial relation. The appellant’s case was also that whenever he tried to make her understand to discharge her matrimonial obligation, she became outraged, she had at one point of time completely denied to have any relationship in future which has resulted into causing mental cruelty.
6. The appellant pleaded that once when he was on leave and staying in home, though the wife was residing in the same accommodation separately, he had witnessed that the wife was having an illicit relationship with a Contractor as well as another boy whose name was not known to the appellant and he had seen his wife and the contractor in a naked and compromising state on 26th April, 2007, and the same event chanced yet again on 26th April, 2007. The entire activity of illicit relationship was performed by the wife by permitting the outside people to visit her by permitting them their entry from the rear door of the house. When the said activity was objected by the husband, the wife used to create pandemonium in the family and shouted at him contending that she will do whatever she wants and nobody can stop her, it was her life, and she has her own way of living.
7. When the husband felt that the situation prevailing was gradually escaping for his control, he on 9th June, 2008, requested the sister and the mother-in-law to make her understand but it yielded no result, hence, the appellant submitted that looking to the aforesaid situation, the matrimony between them have become irretrievable and it was not possible to continue with the same as it was causing, apart from this, both mental and physical cruelty. It has also given a defame to the family and to the husband personally. The proceedings were contested by the wife. She filed her written statement, paper No. 21-A and almost made effort to deny the allegation contending thereof that at the time of marriage, sufficient dowry was given but still she contended that the demand of dowry at the behest of the family members of the husband did not cease and it was ever extending and there was a consistent torture caused on her for bringing less dowry.
8. She also developed the case that the entire issue as has been germinated at the behest of the husband on the pretext that after the marriage, the wife was unable to bear a male child, which according to the wife, was an ardent desire of the family of the husband. She, in a very vague terms, denied the allegations of character and the incident of 26th April, 2007, and 27th April, 2007 and submitted that the husband has got an imbibed habit of doubting the character of the wife. She further submitted while denying the allegation of the plaint that the husband was of such doubtful integrity that he often even used to doubt the wife while she was even taking to any other persons on telephone. To show her piousness, she contended that if the husband was raising an allegation that the wife was having a doubtful character and illicit relation and he has seen her having a physical relation with other persons, then, it was necessary for the husband to have lodged a criminal complaint against the persons and, since, the husband has not done so, she contends that the allegation of having physical relationship, cannot be accepted. She contended that the family of the husband are too introvert family who are the believers of age old traditions and conservatives, which is the basic reason for leveling allegation, as being unaware of modern trend of living.
9. Based on the aforesaid pleadings, the leaned Trial Court framed the two major issues to the following effects:
“Hindi matter omitted”
In support of his case, the plaintiff appellant produced himself as PW1, Smt. Prabha Bhatt as PW2 and Satyendra Bhatt as PW3. The defendant respondent appeared as DW1. There is no documentary evidence adduced by the parties. While deciding the issue No. 1, pertaining to the cruelty, the Court, apart from touching the issue of cruelty had also touched the issue pertaining to the illicit relationship and the physical involvement of the respondent wife. Hence, it could be said that the finding on issue Nos. 1 and 2 are intermingled with one another.
10. The very fact that the wife was seen in a compromising state with another person, no husband would be able to endure the same and he can go to any extent which in the instant case is only confined to seeking to dissolution of marriage. Merely a husband has not initiated a criminal proceedings will not dilute the incident, more particularly, when the incident has not been strictly denied. The defence taken by the wife that if at all he has seen the wife having physical relation with a boy and the contractor, she contended that the said allegation cannot be accepted as if this was true, it was the responsibility of the husband to have initiated the criminal proceedings against the paramours and the wife herself.
11. This Court is of the considered view that this reasoning cannot be accepted, because, it is very difficult for a husband to endure the shock of seeing his wife in a naked and compromising state with another person and no sane husband would ever think of making the said issue relating to his wife having relationship with another person as a public issue by lodging a complaint. Because otherwise, the consequential effect of the lodging of the complaint would be the things which remained within the four corner of the home would be known to the people at large and it would not only be defaming the prestige of the husband but prestige of the wife as well as the family.
12. This Court is of the further considered view that raising such an allegation by husband against the wife is not a trifle issue. It is a situation which comes into existence only when the husband is left remediless, and no husband in such a catastrophic situation, would ever make the issue a public or raise the allegation against his wife. Thus, the contention of the Court below, while recording the finding, is non-reasoned and without application of mind.
13. During the course of argument, another issue which came forward was the effort of settlement which was sought to be made by the interference of Panchayat. The respondent wife, in her cross-examination, she admitted the document, i.e. the settlement of Gram Panchayat, paper 27A-1, and the affidavit filed in support thereof but she denies the same, since it does not bear her signature, no reliance can be placed on the same. She further contends that the said panchayatnama since it was in relation to the dispute which took place between the husband and wife in the night of 18th July, 2009, hence, the same would not be covering the entire issue and, thus, the allegation of cruelty is not established.
14. It seems that the wife had a pre-conceived notion to somehow ruining the matrimonial life of the husband because by extending her arguments, beyond what was pleaded in the written statement, she stated that though not established by the evidence on record wherein she has alleged that the husband was having a relationship with another lady called as Rakhi and he has soleminised the second marriage with her. This allegation of the appellant, of having soleminsed the second marriage with Rakhi, yet again is not acceptable because Rakhi was never produced by her to support her stand as witness.
15. Hence, looking to the conduct of the wife and the manner in which she has conducted herself in the matrimony, is sufficient enough to show that she has acted with cruelty and apart from physical cruelty, she has also inflicted a mental cruelty when she has indulged herself in physical relation with other male other than her own husband.
16. As such, the judgment rendered by the learned Family Court on 25th March, 2014, impugned in the instant appeal, this Court feels that apart from a faulty appreciation of the affidavit-in-chief filed by the parties has also not rightly appreciated, the circumstances which has been pleaded by the husband about the physical relation which the wife had with other male person. On this count, too, the First Appeal deserves to be allowed. The same is allowed. The impugned judgment and decree is quashed.
The marriage between the parties to the appeal dated 9th May, 1997 is hereby dissolved. Registry is directed to prepare the necessary decree of dissolution of marriage.
No order as to costs.
DISCLAIMER: The above judgement is posted for informational purpose ONLY. Printout/ Copy from this website are not admissible citation in the Court of Law. For a court admissible copy contact your advocate.
You may contact me for consultation or advice by visiting Contact Us
Leave A Comment