The Delhi High Court recently held that a reckless, defamatory and unverified claim of infidelity, sullying the reputation of a spouse, amounts to extreme cruelty.
A Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar said that repeated baseless allegations of infidelity inflict sustained harassment, humiliation and mental agony on a person.
"The making of false, reckless, and unsubstantiated allegations, coupled with the initiation of multiple vexatious litigations against the Respondent and his family members, reveals a vindictive intent on the part of the Appellant. Such conduct clearly amounts to extreme cruelty," the Court observed.
It underscored that the foundation of marriage lies in mutual trust and respect.
When a person is being subjected to public humiliation and reckless allegations from his own spouse, they cannot reasonably be expected to continue cohabiting under such conditions, the Court added.
The Bench made the observation while upholding the decision rendered by a family court granting a divorce to a husband on the grounds of cruelty.
It was stated that the couple got married in 1997. However, marital discord arose between the couple, which led to several complaints by the wife and cross-FIRs. They had been living separately since 2012, and the husband filed for divorce in 2013 on the grounds of cruelty and desertion.
He claimed that his wife was arrogant, insulted him, neglected household duties and drove him out of the matrimonial home. He said that the wife accused him of infidelity without any proof. The wife argued that her husband demanded dowry and indulged in extramarital affairs.
The family court granted a divorce on grounds of cruelty to the husband, holding that he was subjected to cruelty of such a nature and degree that it was impossible for him to reasonably be expected to live with the wife.
The wife then moved the High Court against the order.
After considering the case, the High Court noted that the wife had filed several criminal complaints and a defamation suit against the husband, which showed a consistent pattern of aggressive litigation directed against him.
"The very nature of these allegations, predominantly criminal in character, and their repeated lodging over a prolonged period, particularly when the parties were not even cohabiting, cannot be dismissed as casual or ordinary,” the Court stated.
Further, the Court observed the relationship had reached such levels of hostility, bitterness and acrimony that reconciliation was impossible and would degrade an already “cancerous state of affairs.”
Therefore, the High Court affirmed the family court’s judgment granting a decree of divorce on grounds of cruelty to the husband.
Advocate Mansi Sharma appeared for the wife.
Advocate Tej Pratap, Illashree and Imtiyaz Hussain appeared for the husband.
[Read Judgment]