Accessing Intimate Photographs From Wife's Phone & Threatening To Circulate Them Amounts To Cruelty: Jharkhand High Court
The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that unauthorised access to a spouse's intimate photographs, coupled with threats to circulate them on social media and acts of physical and sexual violence, constitutes cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act. The Court observed that such conduct amounted to “character assassination” of the wife by her own husband.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Arun Kumar Rai was hearing a first appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act against a judgment of the Family Court dismissing the appellant-wife's suit seeking dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Background:
The appellant-wife and the respondent-husband were married on 13 March 2020 at Jhari, Dhanbad, according to Hindu rites and customs. After the marriage, the parties lived together as husband and wife.
The wife contended that one day after the marriage, while she was asleep in her bedroom, the respondent accessed her mobile phone and discovered certain objectionable photographs stored on her Google Drive, which she had inadvertently failed to delete. It was alleged that the respondent transferred these photographs to his own mobile phone without her knowledge and thereafter threatened to upload them on social media platforms. It was further submitted that the respondent subjected the appellant to repeated physical and mental assault and forced her to engage in sexual relations on several occasions.
The respondent-husband alleged that after the marriage, the appellant-wife would speak with another person late into the night. Upon confronting her about what he described as an illicit relationship, the appellant allegedly admitted to being in a relationship with another person and stated that she would not sever that relationship.
The High Court held that cruelty may be physical or mental, intentional or unintentional, and is a relative and subjective concept that must be assessed on the basis of the facts and circumstances of each case. It held that:
“68. It is well settled principle of cruelty as discussed hereinabove that harm or injury to reputation would be important considerations in determining whether the conduct of the defending spouse amounts to cruelty or not and it has to be shown that the defending spouse has treated them with cruelty to cause reasonable apprehension in mind that it will be harmful or injurious to live with the contesting spouse.”
The Court held that the respondent-husband had subjected the appellant-wife to mental cruelty. It noted that the respondent had shown the objectionable photographs to his family members, on the basis of which the appellant was humiliated by them. The Court observed that such conduct amounted to “nothing but the character assassination of the wife by her own husband.”
Accordingly, the Court allowed the appeal and held in favour of the wife, concluding that cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act stood proved.
Title: Debleena Dutta v. Suman Kumar Ruj
Case Number: First Appeal No. 327 of 2023
Appearance: Mr. Sanjay Prasad appeared for the Appellant. Mr. Abhijeet Kr. Singh, Mr. Shashank Kumar, and Mr. Harsh Chandra appeared for the Respondent.