Wife’s involvement in dowry death case no ground for divorce: Jharkhand High Court

The man was challenging the family court’s order of July 2017, which dismissed his divorce plea on grounds of cruelty and desertion.

Tortured stepchildren

The husband claimed that he married the woman in February 1999, and he was earlier married to another woman, from whom he has a son and a daughter who were aged about 16 years and 13 years, respectively, at the time of the filing of the divorce case.  

The husband added that his marriage with the present wife was fixed after confirming that the two children would be living together with the family and accordingly after marriage they all started living together in the flat provided by his employer. 

Justices Sujit Narayan Prasad and Sanjay Prasad rejected the husband’s allegation that his wife had tortured his children from his first marriage.

He claimed that during this stay, the wife mercilessly tortured her step-children and that, when the torture of the two children went beyond limits, he was compelled to send the children to their maternal grandfather’s house.

Later, the parents and brother of the wife started living there, claimed the husband, and allegedly started extorting money from him. Annoyed, the husband allegedly moved to a rented house to have mental peace. He later filed a matrimonial case, but the same was withdrawn due to lack of evidence in December 2001.

Arguments

The man’s counsel, advocate Sanjeev Thakur, argued that the wife, having been convicted for abetting the dowry death of her “Bhabhi” (sister-in-law) and sentenced to life imprisonment, suggests a criminal mentality. It was argued that, in view of such conviction, it is unsafe for the man to continue his married life with her. He argued that the element of cruelty was there as the wife has filed several criminal cases against the husband and his family members. 

On the contrary, the wife, through advocate Saurav Arun, argued that the family court has rightly held that there was no sufficient ground found concerning cruelty and desertion by the wife and, as such, has
dismissed the divorce petition.

Husband ‘deserted’ wife

The court pointed out that the matrimonial law does not recognise conviction for a criminal offence, even of grave nature, as an “independent ground” for divorce. It noted that the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 exhaustively sets out the grounds for ending a marriage and does not recognise conviction for a criminal offence, even one of a grave nature, as an independent ground for divorce. 

“More importantly, even assuming the conviction stands, it does not ipso facto constitute cruelty or any other recognised matrimonial ground,” it added.

The court also noted that within two years of the withdrawal of the husband’s earlier case, both spouses had instituted several criminal proceedings against each other. It observed that the husband had, in fact, filed more cases than the wife. “The multiplicity of proceedings reflects mutual hostility rather than unilateral harassment,” the court said. 

The court also rejected the husband’s allegation that his wife had tortured his children from his first marriage, finding that the evidence on record showed that the children were residing at their maternal grandfather’s place and not with the husband and wife.

On the point of desertion, the court noted that the man had stated that owing to the alleged atrocities and cruelty of the wife, he was compelled to leave the palace and to reside in a rented house for mental peace. It held that the husband can’t get a divorce on this basis as he is the one who deserted the wife and his wife is even willing to resume their married life.

Accordingly, the court dismissed this appeal and upheld the family court’s order, pointing out that it does not require any interference and added, “the family Judge has rightly concluded that the appellant-husband has miserably failed to establish the statutory grounds of cruelty and desertion against the respondent-wife.”