If The Wife Files False Complaint Against Her Spouse, It Amounts To Cruelty, Sufficient Ground For Divorce: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Joginder Singh (Appellant) vs. Rajwinder Kaur (Respondent)

Date of Decision: October 29, 2022

Legal Events:

• The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-husband against the order dated 1.10.2016 passed by learned Additional District Judge.
• Appellant’s petition under Section 13-A of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce has been dismissed. Hence, appeal.

Facts of the Case:

• The marriage between the parties was solemnized in the year 2009-2010. No child was born out of wedlock. It was made it clear that marriage was simple without any dowry.
• The Appellant alleged that respondent did not want to live in the matrimonial house along with his parents and wished to live separately, and failed to perform matrimonial duties.
• It was also alleged by the appellant that respondent is quarrelsome. On 13.10.2013 respondent’s father took her away with gold armaments etc. and never came back. A panchayat was called for reconciliation but to no avail.
• The respondent before the Family Court stated that the appellant’s petition under Section 13 was a counter blast to her petition under Section 125 Cr.PC; and the FIR No. 33 dated 25.3.2014 under Sections 406, 498-A, 120-B IPC.
• Respondent also stated that her parents and other relatives and other respectables had approached the appellant and his parents for rehabilitation of the respondent in her matrimonial house, however, the appellant had refused to take her back.

The Issues Drafted by Family Court

(i) Whether the respondent has treated the petitioner with cruelty after solemnization of their marriage?

(ii) Whether the respondent has deserted the petitioner for a continuous period of more than two years preceding the filing of the present petition?

(iii) Whether the petitioner has suppressed any material facts from the court, if so, its effect?

(iv) Whether the petitioner is entitled to the dissolution of the marriage as prayed for?

(v) Relief.

The learned trial Court vide impugned order dated 1.10.2016 dismissed the appellant’s petition primarily on the ground that the appellant had failed to prove that the respondent had treated him with cruelty or deserted him, and had failed to cite any specific instance of cruelty meted out by the respondent to the appellant. Hence, the present appeal.

Learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently stated before us that the impugned order is erroneous inter alia on the ground that the appellant had cited specific instances of cruelty by the respondent.

During the pendency of this appeal, the present Court tried to reconcile the differences through but mediation attempts failed.

The Hon’ble High Court observed that once criminal litigation is initiated between the parties it leads to a point of no return. And if it is a false case filed by the wife merely to harass and humiliate the husband and his family, then the resultant bitterness rarely leaves any room or reason for reconciliation.

It was further observed, citing the authority of Hon’ble Supreme Court that “if the wife files false complaint against her spouse, it amounts to cruelty and is sufficient ground for divorce”.

The references of the following cases were made in the Judgment:

• Rani Narsimha Sastry v Rani Suneela Rani in SLP(Civil) 1981 of 2019
• Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam v. State of Bihar (SC)
• Sushil Kumar Sharma v. Union of India and others
• Sushma Taya v Arvind 2015(2) RCR 888 (P&H): filing of false criminal complaint by a spouse invariably and inevitably amounts to matrimonial cruelty and entitles the other to claim divorce.
• A. Jayachandra v Aneel Kaur 2005 (2) SCC 22
• Raj Talreja v. Kavita Talreja’, (2017): Cruelty can never be defined with exactitude. What is cruelty will depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case.

While concluding the Case, the Hon’ble High Court remarked that since both are determined to live separately, reconciliation seems not possible, and mediation attempts failed, such marriage is mere “legal fiction”. It was pointed out that “irretrievable breakdown of marriage” is not available as a ground under the statute, yet, the reality of it has been recognised by the Supreme

Cases on Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriages:

• K. Srinivas Rao vs. D.A. Deepa (2013) 5 SCC 226:
• Naveen Kohli v. Neelu Kohli, (2006) 4 SCC 558
• Sandhya Rani v. Kalyanram Narayanan, (1994) Supp. 2 SCC 588
• Chandrakala Menon v. Vipin Menon, (1993)2 SCC 6
• Kanchan Devi v. Promod Kumar Mittal, 1996(2) RCR (Criminal) 614 : (1996)8 SCC

Considering the facts and circumstances and peculiar nature of the case, and to do complete justice, and put end to the agony of the parties, the Hon’ble High Court deemed it appropriate to allow the present appeal, marriage is dissolved by decree of divorce.

Further, it was directed that the husband shall pay to the wife a sum of INR 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) as one-time permanent alimony as full and final settlement of all disputes between the parties.

CORAM:

HON’BLE JUSTICE MS. RITU BAHRI

HON’BLE JUSTICE MS. NIDHI GUPTA