Removing ‘Thali’ (mangalsutra), false allegations amount to ‘mental cruelty’: Court ends 49-year-old marriage

Justice P Vadamalai relied on earlier decisions of the Madras High Court that discussed the cultural and emotional significance of the thali in Hindu marriages. (Image enhanced using AI)

Court places significance on removal of ‘Thali’

One of the most striking aspects of the judgment relates to the wife’s admission that she had removed her thali and was no longer wearing gold ornaments.

The court relied on earlier decisions of the Madras High Court that discussed the cultural and emotional significance of the thali in Hindu marriages.

Quoting a division bench judgment, Justice Vadamalai noted, “It is known fact that no Hindu married woman would remove the ‘Thali’ at any point of time during the lifetime of her husband. ‘Thali’ around the neck of a wife is a sacred thing which symbolises the continuance of married life and it is removed only after the death of Husband. Therefore, the removal of ‘Thali’ by the petitioner/wife can be said to be an act, which reflected Mental Cruelty of highest order as it could have caused agony and hurted the sentiments of the respondent.”

The court said the wife’s own evidence showed that she had removed the thali, and this conduct was relevant while assessing mental cruelty.

Marriage of nearly five decades ends in court

• The parties married on August 30, 1977, according to Hindu rites and customs and had two children.
• According to the husband, marital discord began early in the relationship because his wife repeatedly accused him of maintaining illicit relationships with other women.
• He alleged that she sent complaints to his superior officers while he was serving in the Indian Army, publicly humiliated him and later converted to Christianity.
• The wife, however, contended that her allegations were genuine and stemmed from her husband’s conduct.
• She accused him of having relationships with several women and claimed that criminal proceedings against him arose from acts of violence committed by him against her.
• The husband eventually approached the court in 2014 seeking divorce on grounds of cruelty, desertion and conversion.

Complaints to Army officers amounted to mental cruelty

• A key factor in the case was the wife’s admission during evidence that she had indeed sent complaints to Army authorities accusing her husband of maintaining relationships with other women.
• The court noted that such admissions constituted strong evidence and referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Joydeep Majumdar v. Bharti Jaiswal Majumdar.
• In this Supreme Court verdict, defamatory complaints made by one spouse to the employer of the other were held to constitute mental cruelty.
• Justice Vadamalai observed that allegations affecting a person’s reputation before colleagues and superiors could have serious consequences and could not be lightly ignored.
• The court also rejected the wife’s argument that the husband had condoned those allegations by continuing to live with her after his retirement from the Army in 1991.
• According to the judgment, disputes over the same allegations continued even after retirement and ultimately led to criminal litigation and prolonged separation.

Thirty years of separation showed marriage had broken down

The court also noted that the parties had been living separately since the mid-1990s.

The wife admitted during her evidence that she had been living apart from her husband since 1996.

The court further observed that she had not initiated any proceedings seeking restitution of conjugal rights or reunion.

While acknowledging that the irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not an independent statutory ground for divorce available to high courts, Justice Vadamalai held that prolonged separation could be considered while assessing whether one spouse had subjected the other to mental cruelty.

Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the court observed that a marriage which has existed only on paper for decades and is accompanied by bitterness and litigation can itself become a source of cruelty.

Appeal dismissed

Finding no error in the concurrent findings of the lower courts, the High Court dismissed the wife’s appeal and confirmed the divorce decree.

“The concurrent finding of the Courts below does not warrant interference by way of this appeal,” the court held while affirming the judgments of the trial court and the first appellate court.