Cruelty on Husband

Introduction

Cruelty is a ground of divorce and a matrimonial relief under Hindu Laws. A wife or even a husband is entitled to present a petition for divorce before the Court in case of cruelty. According to the provisions of Sec. 13(1)(iA) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, any marriage solemnized whether before or after the commencement of the Act, may on petition by either husband or wife, be dissolved by decree of divorce on the ground that the other party has after the solemnization of marriage, treated the petitioner with cruelty.

Meaning of cruelty

Term ‘cruelty’ has not been defined in the Hindu Marriage Act. Legal concept of ‘cruelty’ had varied from time to time as social and economic conditions changes. It comprises of an act of physical violence by one spouse to another resulting in injury to body, limb or health or causing reasonable apprehension of the same. The term ‘cruelty’ has a vast scope and it consists of mental as well as physical cruelty.

Concept of cruelty

It includes both physical and mental torture. Abnormal behavior, continuous taunting or teasing, or pressing for obtaining consent of the first wife for the second marriage, depending upon the circumstances, e.g., amount to cruelty. It also includes harassing of husband by wife causing mental torture as well.

Recently, the High Court held that wife visiting her husband’s office and abusing him would amount to cruelty. We must think that there are no provisions in law that protects men against such mental torture and they have no remedy in law but just to seek divorce from wife for her unruly behavior.

In Mohd. Hoshan v. State of A.P, 2002 CrLJ 4124– The Apex Court observed, “Whether one spouse has been guilty of cruelty to the other is essentially a question of fact. The impact of complaints, accusation or taunts on a person amounting to cruelty depends on various factors like the sensitivity of the victim concerned, the social background, the environment, education etc. Further, mental cruelty varies from person to person depending on the intensity of the sensitivity, degree of courage and endurance to withstand such cruelty. Each case has to be decided on its own facts whether mental cruelty is made out.”

Nalini Mishra v. Surendra Patel: Judgment analysis

Brief facts of the case

‘X and Y’ got married in 2010 and a child was born out of the wedlock. ‘Y’ alleged that ‘X’ used to spent money as per her own choice and objected to ‘Y’ visiting his parents.

He also said that ‘X’ used to take away his entire salary and used to spent the same in her business. If any query was made about the expenses, it was reciprocated with the abuses. He further stated that ‘X’ bought 5 vehicles on loan without Y’s consent and she deliberately stopped to discharge her household responsibilities including taking care of the child. He added that ‘X’ started making allegations against ‘Y’ to have illicit relations with other women.

Hence, ‘Y’ filed for divorce on ground of cruelty, the Family Court after evaluating the facts and evidence of the instant case, allowed the plea and granted a decree of divorce. Aggrieved by that order, ‘X’ filed an appeal before the High Court.

Relevant case laws

In Vijay Kumar Ramchandra Bhate V. Neela Vijay Kumar Bhate, AIR 2003 SC 2462 and held that when the assassination of character is made by either of the parties it would constitute a mental cruelty for which a claim for divorce under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 would be sustainable.

Observations of the High Court

The Chhattisgarh High Court stated that “The judgment and decree passed by the family court do not require any interference and we affirm the finding arrived at by the family court”.

It was held by the Court that a wife frequently visits her husband’s office and abusing him and creating a scene before his office colleagues would amount to cruelty entitling the husband to divorce.

The Division Bench of the High Court comprising of Justices Goutam Bhaduri and Radhakishan Agrawal was hearing an appeal filed by ‘X’ a woman who challenged the Family Court’s order that granted divorce to ‘Y’ the husband on the grounds of cruelty of ‘X’.

The Court further stated that “It is established that the wife used to visit the office of the husband and create scene with abusive language. In such a situation when a wife goes to the office premises of the husband, abuses him and accuses him of certain relation, naturally it would result into diminishing the image of the husband before the colleagues and the office stature will certainly go down”.

It was observed by the bench that a complaint was filed by ‘X’ with the Chief Minister wherein ‘X’ alleged that ‘Y’ was having an illicit affair with a female colleague and his act amounted to cruelty.

The court said that “Complaint by wife against husband to Minister claiming a transfer of husband on the ground of illicit relation with a lady colleague without any substance would amount to cruelty”.

The Court concluded that after an assessment of the evidence showed that the appellant/wife used to abuse the husband on trivial issues and even other instances of wife’s conduct amounted to cruelty.

The Court noted that it was stated by ‘Y’ that ‘X’ used to abuse her in-laws and stopped ‘Y’ to meet his parents, which would also amount to cruelty. To pull back ‘Y’ to attend the marriage procession in the midway, whereby ‘Y’ was forced to leave the marriage of his younger brother is also an unnatural cruel` act. That the said act caused harm to reputation of family and loss to their prestige, it would also amount to cruelty against ‘Y’ and his family. The bench, therefore, upheld verdict of the Family Court and dismissed the appeal.

It was opined by the High Court that “In such a situation when a wife goes to the office premises of the husband, abuses him and accuses him of certain relations, naturally, it would result in diminishing the image of the husband before the colleagues and the office stature will certainly go down. Except for such an oral bald allegation by the wife, the allegation could not be established.”

It added that “Even it is stated that the wife used to abuse the in-laws and stopped the husband to meet his parents, which would also amount to cruelty. To pull back the husband to attend the marriage procession in the mid-way, whereby the husband was forced to leave the marriage of his younger brother is also an unnatural cruel act. Such an act would bring down the image and the prestige of a family in the public hike, which may also amount to cruelty.”

Conclusion
The time has come to give it a thought that there is a need of laws for men. There rights are to be protected and mental/ physical torture or harassment against man needs to be dealt strictly. In the instant article we have discussed a recently case in detail wherein a wife used to visit his husband’s office and create a scene by abusing him. Imagine the mental agony of that man who has been undergoing such harassment without any legal remedy. If he wishes to file a complaint against his wife for her act, then under which provision he should proceed? These are the legal lacunas that must be considered on an urgent basis without any delay. Men’s rights should also be protected.