7-year separation for PhD at IIT not ‘desertion’: Telangana High Court overturns decade-old divorce decree

Marriage tested by time, distance

The couple married in February 1995 and had a son two years later. Their relationship, as the court records show, went through phases – periods of living together interspersed with stretches of separation.

Things took a decisive turn in 2003 when the husband moved to Chennai to pursue a PhD at IIT Madras. What was meant to be a three-year programme stretched to seven, ending only in 2010.

During those years, the wife stayed back in Hyderabad with their child. That arrangement, which may have seemed practical at the time, later became the cornerstone of the husband’s case that she had effectively deserted him by refusing to relocate.

He also accused her of being unreasonable, alleging that she pressured him over career choices and family arrangements.

Justices K Lakshman and B R Madhusudhan Rao said there was little to show sustained or serious misconduct in the marriage during the years that mattered.

From notices to divorce

In 2011, shortly after completing his PhD, the husband sent legal notices and moved the family court seeking divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, citing cruelty and desertion.

The family court accepted his version and, in March 2016, granted a decree of divorce.

But the wife challenged that decision in the Telangana High Court, arguing that the separation was never intended to be permanent and that they had remained in touch throughout.

What high court found

• Going through the evidence, the Telangana High Court was not convinced by the husband’s claims.
• On desertion, the judges focused on a basic legal requirement: the separation must continue for at least two years immediately before filing the divorce case.
• Here, the timeline simply did not add up. The husband completed his PhD in July 2010 and filed for divorce in July 2011, well short of the required period.
• There was also material on record, including emails and financial support, that suggested the relationship, though strained, had not completely broken down.
• On cruelty, the Telangana High Court noted that most of the testimony relied on by the husband related to older disputes, many of them dating back to before he left for Chennai.
• There was little to show sustained or serious misconduct during the years that mattered.
• Except the testimony of the husband, “there is no other evidence”, the Telangana High Court observed, pointing out the lack of independent proof.

No clear intention to end marriage

A key factor that weighed with the court was the wife’s consistent stand that she was willing to live with her husband and had never intended to end the relationship. She also told the court that she had not stopped him from meeting their son.

That, the bench said, cuts against the idea of “desertion”, which in law requires not just physical separation but a clear intention to permanently walk away from the marriage.

In the end, the Telangana High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the family court’s order, and dismissed the husband’s divorce petition.