Spouse Opposing Divorce Despite No Scope Of Rehabilitation, Deriving Satisfaction From It Amounts To Cruelty: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court, in an appeal filed by a wife challenging the Family Court's order denying her divorce, observed that if one spouse opposes divorce despite there being no possibility of cohabitation, such conduct of deriving satisfaction from the continued distress and tension of the other party can itself amount to cruelty. 

The division bench of Justice Vishal Dhagat and Justice BP Sharma observed; 

"Other party opposes the prayer for divorce despite their being no possibility of their living together. Said conduct of party in deriving pleasure from difficulties and tension of other party also amounts to cruelty". 

The counsel for the wife contended that the marriage was solemnised on May 24, 2022, per the Hindu rites. They had two children, who are now in the custody of their husband. She filed a divorce petition on grounds of cruelty and desertion, contending that the husband demanded dowry and harassed her. 

Counsel for the husband contended that the wife had solemnised a second marriage on January 25, 2018, without obtaining a divorce, and therefore, a complaint case for Bigamy (Section 494 of the IPC) was filed against her second husband. 

The court noted that both parties had filed a petition seeking divorce and had submitted that they were living together in marital ties due to social compulsion. It was also noted that there was bitterness between the couple, and they were living in constant tension. It was also noted that after living for some time together, the husband drove the wife out of the house. She subsequently solemnised a second marriage. 

The court noted that the Family Court dismissed the divorce petition on the presumption that the wife had an adulterous life and could not be given the advantage of her own misdeeds, as it would be like granting a premium on misdeeds. 

However, the bench noted that there was a complete breakdown of marriage, as the wife was living her life in an invalid second marriage while the husband was living separately with his daughters. The bench opined that no purpose would be served if the petition were dismissed due to the wife's default. 

The bench further emphasised that while an irretrievable breakdown of marriage was not a ground enumerated under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1995, the courts cannot shut their eyes to the practical difficulties and problems of the parties, it highlighted; 

"If divorce is not granted in cases of irretrievable breakdown of marriage then it will amount to further pushing party towards continuous pain and suffering. Irretrievable breakdown of marriage is a species within genus of cruelty. Whenever, there is Irretrievable or complete breakdown of marriage then both parties are under pain and suffers day to day cruelty as they were not permitted to exercise their choices and option to choose their partners in life".

In view of the aforesaid discussion, the court allowed the divorce on the ground that the husband was treating the wife with cruelty by not giving her the option to live her life according to her choice, which was a fundamental right. 

Case Title: PS v OS [FA-789-2022]

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 261

For Appellant: Advocate Sanjay Gupta

For Respondent: Advocate Yashovardhan Shukla 

Click here to read/download the Order