Wife Refused To Fast For 'Karwa Chauth': Delhi HC Upholds Order Granting Divorce To Man On Ground Of 'Cruelty'

The Delhi HC upheld an order by a family court granting divorce to a husband on the ground of cruelty by his wife.

The Delhi High Court upheld an order by a family court granting divorce to a husband on the ground of cruelty by his wife. A division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed that constant rejection and non-acknowledgment of the husband in a marriage by his wife is a source of "great mental agony" for him, as reported by Live Law. Advocate Jyoti Batra represented the wife, and Advocate Shailender Dahiya appeared for the husband. The couple got married in March 2011 and started living separately just six months later.

The court said that the husband had deposed that the wife had refused to keep the fast of "Karwa Chauth," saying that she considered another man as her husband. The appellant also said that she was forced into marriage by her parents against her wishes. "Such disconnect and constant rejection of any relationship or non-acknowledgement of the respondent as a husband is again a source of great mental agony for a husband," the court said, as quoted by Live Law.

While dismissing the wife’s appeal, the bench said that the wife’s conduct has been held by the family court to have caused immense mental suffering, pain, and cruelty to the husband, thereby entitling him to divorce.

"The evidence on record established that the marriage for the parties was not a bed or roses as the appellant had extreme reluctance to conjugal relationship, and it was after much cajoling that they were able to develop a conjugal relationship, though it was totally devoid of any emotional relationship," the court said, as quoted by Live Law.

The court also noted that the evidence proved that the wife had threatened the husband of committing suicide on two occasions. "Such threats are likely to affect the peace of mind and take a toll on the mental wellbeing of the respondent, and thus, the learned Principal Judge had rightly held this behaviour of the appellant to be an act of immense cruelty," the court said, as quoted by Live Law.

The bench also observed that the criminal case in which the husband was acquitted under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, along with his family members, proved that all allegations of dowry and harassment by the wife were not substantiated.

"In the present case, the appellant has not been able to prove that she was subjected to any dowry demands or harassed or subjected to cruelty. Though she had alleged harassment on account of dowry, those allegations have not been proved either in the criminal case or in the present case," the court said.

It added, "members. A relationship of marriage rests on mutual trust, respect, and companionship, and the acts of the appellant, as discussed above, clearly establish and prove that these elements were totally missing from their marriage, essentially on account of the conduct of the appellant."