Notice over WhatsApp valid, Telangana High Court upholds Dubai-based man’s divorce

“In view of the filing of a criminal case under Section 498-A (husband or his relative subjecting woman to cruelty) of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the mother and sister of the appellant were aware of the marital disputes, and they cannot be ignorant of the divorce proceedings,” it noted.

“Notice was served on the petitioner virtually. However, the petitioner had filed copies of his passport to show that he was in Dubai when notice was purported to be served on him. According to the respondent, the notice was served on the petitioner through WhatsApp chat and cell phone. The documents were sent to the petitioner, and he received the same. There are no reasons given as to how he had knowledge about the divorce and his lack of knowledge about the respondent obtaining a divorce through the court,” the judges stated.

Since the man and his mother were named as accused in the criminal case filed by the wife, there is no question of them not knowing about the divorce proceedings filed by the woman, the bench said, and found no merit in his plea.

Justices Moushumi Bhattacharya and Renuka Yara said the petitioner could not make a blanket allegation of fraudulent service.

Wife alleged dowry harassment, husband left for Dubai

The case arose from the wife’s petition seeking dissolution of her marriage with the man. The wedding was solemnised in 2021 as per Hindu customs and traditions. According to the wife, a dowry of Rs 10 lakh and household articles worth Rs 5 lakh were given to the petitioner-husband, and the wife’s parents incurred an amount of Rs 3 lakh towards wedding expenses.

The wife alleged that the husband started to harass her to bring additional dowry of Rs 5 lakh, eventually forcing her to leave and go to her parents’ house after just 15 days of the wedding.

The wife said the petitioner then went to Dubai and she came to know that he returned twice in November 2023. She claimed that she went to his house with her father but they were not allowed in. Instead, the man’s family demanded an additional dowry of Rs 10 lakh. Subsequently, the wife registered a complaint under the Dowry Prohibition Act and filed a divorce petition on the grounds of cruelty and desertion under the Hindu Marriage Act.

Despite service of notice, the husband did not appear, and the trial court passed an ex parte divorce decree on December 31, 2024. The husband later approached the trial court seeking to set aside the order, claiming that he was in Dubai for employment and had never been properly served a notice.

He alleged that notice had fraudulently been served on another person. The trial court rejected his plea and also refused to condone the 204-day delay in filing it. He then challenged that order before the high court.

Can’t be ignorant of proceedings: Order

The high court observed that the trial court’s docket clearly recorded service of notice on the appellant through WhatsApp on his Dubai number on December 11, 2024. The notice was sent from the respondent’s father’s mobile number, and copies of the served documents were placed before the trial court.

The court held that the petitioner could not make a blanket allegation of fraudulent service. He was required to specifically deny whether the number from which the notice was sent belonged to the respondent’s father and whether the Dubai number belonged to him.

It also noted that the petitioner and his mother were accused in the criminal case arising from the matrimonial dispute. Therefore, it found it difficult to accept the argument that the petitioner and his family were unaware of the divorce proceedings.

Finding no merit in the petitioner’s challenge, the court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the trial court’s order refusing to set aside the ex parte divorce decree.