Wife Forcing Friends and Family to Stay at Husband’s Home Without Consent Considered Cruelty: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court has ruled that a wife compelling her husband to accommodate her friends and family at his residence against his wishes amounts to cruelty.
A division bench comprising Justices Sabyasachi Bhattacharya and Uday Kumar stated that the respondent-wife’s mother would not have stayed at the husband’s Kolaghat residence if her pension or the wife’s earnings had been exploited by him.
The case arose when the husband filed an appeal against a lower court’s dismissal of his divorce petition, which was filed on the grounds of cruelty.
Background of the Case
The couple married in 2005 under the Special Marriage Act and initially lived at their matrimonial home in Nabadwip before relocating to Kolaghat, where the husband worked and had official quarters.
In 2008, the husband filed for divorce, alleging cruelty. Shortly after, the wife lodged a complaint against him and his family under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, initiating criminal proceedings.
Husband’s Claims
The husband argued that during their time together, the wife imposed her friend, Mousumi Paul, on him, allowing her to stay for extended periods. Additionally, the wife’s mother frequently resided with them.
He claimed the wife prioritized her friend over family time, constituting cruelty. He also accused the wife of filing a false complaint only after receiving a summons for the divorce case, further aggravating the situation.
The husband alleged that the wife had no interest in maintaining a conjugal relationship or starting a family, and her desertion and refusal to return to him amounted to further cruelty.
Wife’s Defense
The wife contended that there was no evidence in the husband’s petition to support claims of cruelty stemming from the alleged false complaint. She argued that she faced ill-treatment when she attempted to retrieve her belongings from Nabadwip.
She also highlighted the inconvenience of commuting from Kolaghat to her workplace in Sealdah, which prompted her move to Narkeldanga, where she had official quarters. She denied any allegations of forcing the husband out of her Narkeldanga residence.
Court’s Observations
The High Court noted that the trial judge had imposed personal views on the concept of marriage and morality rather than focusing on the unique circumstances of the case.
The bench emphasized that matrimonial cases must consider the specific issues between the individuals involved rather than idealized notions of marital life.
Verdict
The High Court overturned the trial court’s decision, granted the appeal, and issued a decree of divorce in favor of the husband.
Case Title: Mr. Dhiraj Guin vs Mrs. Tanushre Majumder
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==
