In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court declared that a wife forcing her husband to live in a separate room and denying him conjugal rights constitutes cruelty. The court made this observation while granting a divorce to the husband, who claimed that his wife not only forced him to live separately but also threatened to commit suicide and file criminal cases if he entered her room.
Court Observes Cruelty in Matrimonial Relationship
A Division Bench of Justice Ranjan Roy and Justice Subhash Vidyarthi presided over the case. They concluded that the wife’s refusal to cohabit with her husband and her insistence on separate living arrangements amounted to an abandonment of the matrimonial relationship.
The court remarked, “Cohabitation is an essential part of marriage. If a wife forces her husband to live in a separate room, depriving him of conjugal rights, it negatively impacts his mental and physical health. This amounts to both mental and physical cruelty.”
Case Background: Marriage and Divorce Proceedings
The couple married in 2016. It was the husband’s second marriage, while the wife was married for the first time. According to the husband’s claims, their relationship was normal for only 4-5 months after the wedding. After that, the wife allegedly began to harass him and forced him to live in a separate room.
In 2018, the husband approached the family court seeking a divorce on the grounds of cruelty. Initially, the wife appeared before the court, but later she failed to respond to further proceedings, leading to an ex-parte judgment.
Family Court’s Initial Rejection
In January 2023, the family court rejected the husband’s plea, reasoning that he had not provided enough specific details about the alleged threats from his wife. Dissatisfied with the outcome, the husband took his case to the High Court.
The High Court noted that the wife had not filed a written statement to contest her husband’s claims, thereby implying acceptance of the allegations. “The plaintiff’s [husband] accusation of being denied his conjugal rights was not challenged by the defendant [wife] and was, thus, admitted by implication,” the court observed.
High Court’s Ruling
The High Court disagreed with the family court’s approach in dismissing the testimony of the husband’s father, reasoning that family members are often the most natural witnesses in matrimonial disputes. “In family disputes, events happen within the home, and relatives are typically the best witnesses. Their testimony cannot be dismissed solely because they are related to one party,” the court noted.
Furthermore, the High Court criticized the family court for being influenced by the fact that the husband had experienced marital disputes with his first wife. The court clarified that the previous marriage had ended with mutual consent and no allegations were made against him in that case.
Divorce Granted on Grounds of Cruelty
In its final judgment, the High Court found enough evidence to conclude that the wife’s actions constituted cruelty, thereby granting the husband a divorce. The court emphasized that while the issue of desertion was also proven, the case was decided solely on the grounds of cruelty, which was sufficient to dissolve the marriage.
The judgment highlights the importance of mutual respect and cohabitation in a marriage, affirming that forcing a partner to live in isolation within the home constitutes a breach of matrimonial obligations.
Be a part our social media community:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IndianMan.in?mibextid=ZbWKwL
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/indianman.in?igsh=MWZ2N3N0ZmpwM3l3cw==
