Wife Who Voluntarily Left Matrimonial Home, Engaged In Extramarital Relationship Not Entitled To Divorce: MP High Court

While upholding the dismissal of a wife's divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the Madhya Pradesh High Court observed that the wife had left the matrimonial home of her own volition and had engaged in an extramarital affair and therefore was not entitled to divorce. [2026 LiveLaw (MP) 276]

Further noting that the wife's allegations of cruelty and dowry demand were vague and unsupported by evidence, the division bench of Justice GS Ahluwalia and Justice Anuradha Shukla observed:

"The trial Court has very meticulously considered the facts and evidence available on record and reached to the finding that none of the grounds of divorce was proved against respondent. Further, Section 23(1)(a) of Hindu Marriage Act 1955 bars a relief to a petitioner, who is in any way taking advantage of his or her own wrong or disability for the purpose of such relief. Here too, in the facts of the case, it is proved that appellant herself was involved in adulterous act and had voluntarily left her matrimonial house. The other aspects of cruelty, as were claimed by appellant regarding dowry, harassment and physical violence, have not been proved either. Hence, the trial Court has committed no error in rejecting the divorce petition. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed". 

Per the petition, the couple got married in 2015 but did not have a child. The wife filed the divorce petition on the grounds that the husband was cruel to her and used to physically assault her after consuming liquor. 

She claimed that her husband demanded dowry and also compelled her to establish illicit relationships with others. The wife further claimed that the husband chastised the character of the wife. She also argued that she was forced to leave the matrimonial home three years before filing the divorce petition. 

The husband refuted these claims, contending that the wife had left the matrimonial house along with her brother. The wife took her stridhan and other valuable articles. Earlier, the wife had gone missing in 2019, for which the husband also lodged a missing persons report. 

He claimed that the wife left the house on her own volition and that he wants to restore conjugal rights. 

The Trial Court, after recording evidence, dismissed the petition. 

The division bench noted that the divorce was filed on two grounds: cruelty and desertion. However, the court also noted that the allegations of cruelty and physical violence in the wife's case were vague. From the divorce proceedings, the court noted that the wife was silent about the articles demanded in dowry and the kind of cruelty she was subjected to after the dowry demands were not fulfilled. 

The bench further noted that the wife's allegations were "omnibus and have no corroborative strength".

Further, the court noted that in her FIR, she had accused 3 men. The Trial Court prosecuted four people for the offence of rape (Section 376), criminal conspiracy (Section 120), kidnapping (Section 366), wrongful confinement (Section 344) and criminal intimidation (Section 506) of the IPC. However, the sessions court acquitted the men, holding that one of the accused, R, had established physical relations with the wife, who was a consenting party. This order of the session court was not challenged. 

Considering the vagueness of the wife's allegations and her extramarital affair, the court upheld the Trial Court order. Therefore, the court dismissed the appeal. 

Case Title: LY v RY, FA-483-2022

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 276

For Appellant: Advocate Akshat Kumar Jain

Click here to read/download the Order