Questioning Husband's Legitimacy, Casting Aspersions On His Mother Amounts To Mental Cruelty: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that questioning husband's legitimacy by calling him bastard and making reprehensible allegations against his mother constitute matrimonial cruelty, a ground for divorce.

A division bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar thus upheld the divorce decree granted by the family court in favour of Respondent-husband.

Appellant-wife had approached the High Court claiming that the family court failed to consider the acts of cruelty meted out to her and wrongly granted divorce to husband.

She claimed that Respondent humiliated her by making caste-based remarks, coerced her to perform domestic chores despite her professional responsibilities and subjected her to a barrage of false and frivolous litigation.

However, the High Court held that mere assertion of counter-cruelty by the wife would not automatically nullify her established acts of cruelty.

“Two wrongs do not make a right. The Appellant's proven acts of cruelty, including the use of abusive language, physical violence, and social isolation, stand on their own footing and are severe enough to warrant the dissolution of the marriage,” it said.

The Court noted that the Appellant sent “vile, derogatory, and scandalous” messages to the Respondent, including questioning his legitimacy and making reprehensible allegations against his mother.

“Specific messages dated 09.05.2011, 15.05.2011, and 27.06.2011, which included terms such as “bastard”, “son of a bitch,” and suggestions that his mother should “earn through prostitution”, are by themselves sufficient to constitute mental cruelty of the gravest kind,” it observed.

The Court added, “Words and communications of the sort proved in this case are not innocuous. The law recognizes that mental cruelty may be visited by persistent and deliberate verbal abuse and conduct that degrades a spouse and injures reputation and self-respect. The text messages in question contained imputations of illegitimacy, filthy epithets directed at the Respondent‟s mother and other degrading expressions a pattern of conduct which, cumulatively, the learned Family Court was entitled to regard as causing grave mental agony to the Respondent.”

As such, the Court dismissed the wife's appeal and upheld the divroce.

Appearance: Mr. Sarim Naved and Mr. Zeeshan Ahmad, Advs. and Appellant in-person through VC for Appellant; Mr. Rakesh Tiku, Senior Advocate with Ms. Arpan Wadhawan, Advocate and Respondent in-person.

Case title: X v. Y

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1347

Case no.: MAT.APP.(F.C.) 2/2024

Click here to read order