‘Victim’ turns aggressor: Why Jharkhand High Court refused divorce to man who ‘tortured’ wife with false allegations

Justices Sujit Narayan Prasad and Sanjay Prasad noted that the husband failed to prove the allegation regarding the wife’s pregnancy and abortion.

The husband claimed before the Jharkhand High Court that the wife had entered into an agreement with him in January 2022 and that he paid her Rs 12 lakh, agreeing on a mutual divorce, but she failed to honour the terms. 

Marriage, agreement and litigation 

It was placed on record that the couple got married in December 2020, according to Hindu rites and customs. It was alleged that after some time, the wife visited her paternal house in October 2021. She returned to her matrimonial home in December 2021. 

After returning, she allegedly started quarrelling and treated the husband and his family members with cruelty, stopped providing food and used to abuse the petitioner. 

It was added that the petitioner is the only son of his parents and is responsible for the care of his parents and grandparents as well. He further alleged that his wife was not ready to hear anything, and began to pressure him to give her Rs 12 lakh for divorce, as she did not want to live with him. 

Subsequently, the petitioner is said to have given her Rs 12 lakh, whereupon she entered into an agreement to the effect that within three months, she would file a divorce petition and would return the ornaments, given by her in-laws, worth Rs 5 lakh. 

It was also allegedly written in the agreement that if she did not take a divorce within three months, it would be deemed that the divorce had taken place.

The husband claimed before the Jharkhand High Court that the wife did not adhere to the terms and conditions of the agreement, and consequently, he sent a legal notice, whereupon she returned to her matrimonial home, and again, an agreement was prepared in May 2022, in which it was written that both parties would not torture each other.

But, after some time, she allegedly started to pressurise the petitioner again to sell his ancestral property and purchase a flat in another place to live there. 

It was alleged that in the meantime, she became pregnant, but was not ready to be a mother, and she left her for her paternal home in August 2022 and got an abortion. 

It was further added that the petitioner allegedly issued a legal notice in March 2023 to return his Rs 12 lakh and ornaments of Rs 5 lakh and to restore her conjugal life with him, but no reply was given, nor did she return. 

Subsequently, the husband filed a divorce case, which was sent to the mediation centre, where both parties agreed that the petitioner would give Rs 3.5 lakh to the wife as permanent alimony and they would file for divorce with mutual consent, but it was disputed by the wife. 

‘Cruelty need not be illegal acts’

• The Jharkhand High Court stated that the nature of the allegations need not only be “illegal” conduct, such as asking for dowry, for it to be considered cruel.
• Making allegations against the spouse in the written statement filed before the court in judicial proceedings may also be held to constitute cruelty. 
• The court also noted that the wife made an objection that she was under pressure during mediation, and she never wanted a divorce and even today, she is ready to live with the petitioner. 
• The Jharkhand High Court emphasised that the husband himself admitted in his evidence that he is ready to keep his wife.
• This means it cannot be said that “nothing is left” between the couple and they cannot live together, or there is “no hope” of their reunion. 
• The husband also failed to prove the allegation regarding the wife’s pregnancy and abortion, the Jharkhand High Court noted.
• The bench held that it is apparent that the petitioner has failed to prove the allegation of cruelty meted out by the wife. 
• The judgment and decree passed by the family court, denying the divorce to the husband on the ground of cruelty, requires no interference, the Jharkhand High Court subsequently held. 

‘Superiority complex of wife’

Appearing for the husband, advocate Anjani Kr Verma argued that the family court did not consider the fact that the husband was subjected to cruelty at the hands of her wife due to personal ego, a superiority complex of being brought up in a posh area and dissatisfaction with being married to him residing in a village area. 

The petitioner has alleged that she pressured her to sell his ancestral land and purchase a flat in another place in her name so that both can live in that place, else she would implicate him in a false case. 

Conspiracy of petitioner

Representing the wife, advocate Vijay Kumar Sharma argued that she never treated the petitioner and his family with cruelty and never pressured him to sell his ancestral land, nor did she threaten him.

She always respected her in-laws and grandfather-in-law, the counsel stated, adding that the January 2022 agreement was prepared by the petitioner himself by forging the wife’s signature.

It was further submitted before the Jharkhand High Court that the wife never proposed taking a divorce, and it was false that she had taken Rs 12 lakh. Rather, the counsel claimed that this claim was part of the petitioner’s conspiracy so that she would leave her matrimonial home and he could remarry.  

It was also mentioned that she put her signature on the agreement of May 2022 so that her conjugal life may be pleasant, but again, she became the prey of a conspiracy of her husband and his family members and was driven out of her matrimonial home.