News Updates

Unsubstantiated Scandalous Allegations By Wife Against Husband Is ‘Cruelty’: Patna HC [Read Judgment]

Ashok KM
17 March 2017 5:03 AM GMT
Unsubstantiated Scandalous Allegations By Wife Against Husband Is ‘Cruelty’: Patna HC [Read Judgment]
Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

Granting divorce to a husband, the Patna High Court has observed that unsubstantiated scandalous allegation by a wife against husband amounts to cruelty against him.

During her cross examination, the wife had alleged that the husband had some illicit relationship with his sister-in-law, which was denied by the husband. She had also alleged that the husband is an illegitimate son. Both these allegations were not proved by her. “Such unsubstantiated scandalous allegations on the part of the respondent would undeniably constitute an act of torture and mental cruelty inflicted upon the appellant,” a bench comprising Justice Navaniti Prasad Singh and Justice Vikash Jain said.

The court observed though marriage was solemnised between the parties two decades ago, the couple never lived harmoniously as husband and wife. Litigations have been going on for more than a decade. In such a situation, there can hardly be said to have existed a marriage worth its name, the bench said.

The wife had filed various criminal cases against the husband in which he got acquittals. She had filed revision petitions against such acquittals, but opposed the divorce petition filed by the husband and at the same time sought restitution of conjugal rights.

In this regard, the court said: “It is also not clear why the respondent is pursuing her revision applications opposing the acquittal of the appellant and his family members on the one hand, while simultaneously seeking restitution of conjugal rights on the other. Why she opposes divorce is not understood.”

Read the Judgment here.

Next Story