Punjab and Haryana High Court: In a matter with regard to mental cruelty, the Division Bench of Ritu Bahri and Ashok Kumar Verma, JJ., observed that, even if the husband and wife were staying together and the husband stopped talking to the wife, it would cause mental cruelty and a spouse staying away by sending vulgar and defamatory letters or notices by initiating a number of judicial proceedings could make the life of other spouse miserable.
Appellant-wife came up in the present appeal against the decision of the Family Court by the respondent-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce was allowed and he had been granted a divorce.
As per the husband, when he filed a petition under Section 13 of the HMA, the behaviour of the respondent was very cruel, barbaric, rude and crude towards the respondent from the very beginning.
It was stated that, the wife had tried to take forcible possession of the agricultural land owned and possessed by the respondent and a civil suit against the appellant was pending in the District Courts, Karnal.
Further, it was alleged that the appellant was living in adultery with some person in the year 2012 and she forcibly turned out the respondent along with his four children from the house.
When the marriage of the husband and wife was fixed by the respondent, husband had requested the appellant to join the marriage, but she taunted that she had no concern with the respondent and his children.
In view of the above, a divorce petition was filed.
Analysis, Law and Decision
High Court expressed that, even if husband and wife are staying together and the husband does not speak to the wife, it would cause mental cruelty and a spouse staying away by sending vulgar and defamatory letters or notices or filing complaints containing indecent allegations or by initiating a number of judicial proceedings can make the life of other spouse miserable.
The Bench stated that in the present case, after the acquittal in the FIR and dismissal of the domestic violence complaint, enough mental cruelty had been caused to the husband.
Hence, the appellant’s counsel was unable to point out any illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgment.
In view of the above, the appeal was dismissed. [Harbans v. Joginder Pal, 2022 SCC OnLine P&H 1101, decided on 6-5-2022]
Advocates before the Court:
Mr. Avtar Singh Sandhu, Advocate, for Mr. A.S. Rai, Advocate, for the appellant-wife.
Mr. R.S. Budhwar, Advocate, for the respondent-husband.