Bombay High Court grants divorce to husband on ground of cruelty after wife creates her profile on matrimonial website, levels false allegations

The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court allowed a divorce plea by a husband on the ground of cruelty by wife after she levelled fake allegations against him and uploaded her profile on matrimonial websites during the pendency of divorce proceedings..A Division Bench of Justices AS Chandurkar and GA Sanap held that the wife’s wild and unfounded allegations as well as her conscious decision to remarry during the pendency of the divorce petition by uploading her profile on two matrimonial websites were enough to prove that the appellant-husband suffered mental cruelty..The Bench was hearing an appeal against the order of a family court at Akola which had rejected the plea of divorce by husband and only granted judicial separation for one year..Before the family court, the husband stated that his wife was aggressive, would lie to him, quarrel, and had an affinity towards her parents’ residence in Akola. She was keen to shift there and insisted that the appellant quit his job to comply with this demand. However, he had a permanent job in the High Court and therefore, refused to quit his job and shift. His wife even made complaints of cruelty and domestic violence before the Magistrate making his life miserable, causing him unbearable harassment and mental cruelty, it was alleged..On the other hand, the wife denied these allegations and claimed that she was harassed for dowry, made to do all the household work, was beaten and tortured and not given meals. After hearing the parties the family court found that the appellant had established a case of cruelty at the hands of his wife but refused to grant divorce. Aggrieved by the order, the appellant moved the High Court..During the hearing before the High Court, the counsel for the appellant brought to the Bench’s attention that the respondent had made her intention of parting ways with appellant clear, by uploading her profile on two matrimonial websites, BharatMatrimony.com and Shaadi.com and that the Family Court did not consider those facts while adjudicating the dispute..To clarify the jurisprudence developed by the Supreme Court while deciding cases of cruelty by wife against her husband, the High Court relied on the following judgments.In Dr. (Mrs.) Malathi Ravi, M.D. vs. Dr. B. V. Ravi, M.D, it was held that if the wife has no intention to lead a normal life, then on the ground of mental cruelty the decree for divorce can be granted. It was further held that the false allegations by one spouse against the other amounts to mental cruelty.In Vishwanath S/o. Sitaram Agrawal vs.Sarla Vishwanath Agrawal, the Supreme Court had held that mental torture caused by one spouse to the another by making wild and false allegations in a report lodged to the authority as well as in the electronic and print media constitute a mental cruelty and as such the ground for divorce.In V Bhagat vs. Mrs. D. Bhagat, the Court found that mental cruelty in Section 131 (i-a) can broadly be defined as that conduct which inflicts upon the other party such mental pain and suffering as would make it impossible for that party to live with the other. It is held that the mental cruelty must be of such a nature that the parties cannot reasonably be expected to live together..After discussing the precedents, the Court proceeded to examine the conduct of the respondent during the pendency of the divorce petition.The Court noted that on perusal of the matrimonial profiles created by the wife, it was clear that even before the divorce petition was decided, the respondent had made up her mind to enter into a second marriage and had uploaded her profile on two websites.“In our opinion, the respondent by uploading her profile on two matrimonial websites made her intention writ large. On the basis of this document it can be inferred that she wanted to get rid of the appellant and wanted to perform the second marriage.”.The High Court also specifically pointed out that the respondent’s conduct was inconsistent with the facts stated by her in the written statement where she contended that she was an obedient wife and daughter-in-law, but the appellant and his parents did not like her and wanted to get rid of her.Further, it was observed that the respondent made serious and wild allegations against the appellant and his parents by way of an FIR and her application under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act..In light of these observations, the Court held that the family court did not consider the evidence regarding matrimonial websites while deciding the matter and in concluding that though cruelty was established, it would not be harmful or injurious for him to live with the wife.“The learned Judge, as can be seen on perusal of the impugned judgment, has not taken into consideration the documentary evidence produced before delivering judgment with regard to the uploading of her marriage profile on the two matrimonial websites. The learned Judge without assigning a convincing reason denied the decree of divorce,” the High Court said..Further, the Court observed that the evidence on record proves that the respondent inflicted upon the appellant mental pain and sufferings which would make it impossible for him to live with the respondent and the mental cruelty is such that it would in all probability cause injury to the health of the appellant..The Bench also remarked that the respondent had made it amply clear that she had no wish or desire to continue in the company of the appellant through her conduct.“If the respondent had sincere wish and desire to save her marriage she would not have taken a conscious decision to perform the second marriage even before the final out come of the divorce petition.”.Therefore, it was held that the judgments discussed squarely applied to the case at hand and the appellant was entitled to divorce on the ground of the mental cruelty meted out to him by the respondent..Advocate Hemant Surve appeared for the appellant..[Read Judgement]