Chhattisgarh HC upholds divorce to man whose wife called him 'paaltu chuha', insisted him to live separately from his parents

The Chhattisgarh High Court recently upheld a family court decision to grant divorce to a man whose wife called him 'paaltu chuha' or pet rat for refusing to live separately from his parents.

The Division Bench of Justice Rajani Dubey and Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad took exception to her conduct of asking the husband to abandon his parents.

In the context of Indian joint family values, compelling a spouse to forsake his parents is cruelty, the Court said.

"This conduct cannot be considered benign; rather, it belies the claim of innocence and instead underscores mental cruelty, particularly in the context of Indian joint family values, where compelling a spouse to forsake his parents is held as cruelty," the Court said.

The couple had got married in 2009 and a child was born to them. The husband filed a divorce plea in 2016, alleging cruelty and desertion by the wife. However, she denied the allegations and claimed to have been emotionally and financially neglected. She also accused the husband of abusive behavior.

A family court in Raipur allowed the husband's plea in 2019 and dissolved the marriage. The wife then moved the High Court.

In the judgment passed on September 3, the High Court found that the wife herself had acknowledged to have sent a text message stating, “If you leave your parents and stay with me, respond; otherwise don’t ask.”

"Though styled as conditional, this message confirms her insistence on the respondent abandoning his parents," the Bench said.

The Court also found that there was no plausible justification for the wife's prolonged stay at her parental home after leaving the matrimonial home in 2010.

"The evidence of respondent, which was largely unchallenged, established she did not return, except for a brief reprieve from mid–October to early November, 2011 during a community reconciliation meeting at Dudhadhari Math, and thereafter remained away," it noted.

The Court declined to accept the argument that the wife's pending plea for restitution of conjugal rights should have influenced the outcome of divorce proceedings. A pending application does not override established findings of cruelty and desertion, it said.

"The court had ample evidence before it and rendered findings after evaluation. In sum, the conclusions arrived at by the family court are neither perverse nor unsustainable. The oral testimonies of the respondent and his family, the documentary evidence of coercion, and castigation of the appellant lie squarely within the legal framework of cruelty. The own admissions made by appellant through cross-examination, including acknowledgement of her desertion, further validate the case of respondent," the Court added.

The Court, thus, upheld the divorce.

Meanwhile, it granted a permanent alimony of ₹5 lakh to the wife.

"Considering the overall circumstances of the case, including the nature of the employment of wife and her responsibility to maintain and educate her son, and further noting that the husband is an accountant in the District Cooperative Bank, Raipur, we deem it appropriate to grant permanent alimony in the sum of ₹5,00,000. This amount shall be in addition to the maintenance awarded under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure," it ordered.

Advocates Shrijita Kesharwani and RK Kesharwani appeared for the wife.

Advocates JA Lohani and BM Roy represented the husband.