"Marriages not made in heaven but hell:" Bombay High Court on constant quarrels between a husband, wife

A case of domestic violence and cruelty involving a slew of complaints and cross complaints by the husband and the wife prompted the Bombay High Court to remark in exasperation about how the two had made their lives hell for each other and that marriages are not always made in heaven [Shivek Ramesh Dhar v. State of Maharashtra]..Single-judge Justice SV Kotwal while granting anticipatory bail to the husband who was accused of cruelty and dowry demands by his wife, observed that there were constant quarrels between them. “FIR shows that how the applicant (husband) and informant (wife) just cannot live together. They were constant quarrels between them," the Court said in its order. During the hearing of the case orally remarked that “marriages are not made in heaven, they are made in hell”..The factual matrix in brief was that the wife had lodged a complaint in December 2021 making the following allegations:That during their marriage in 2017, the husband’s family wanted a gold coin for each family member; due to non-fulfilment of the demand, there was harassment to the wife;That the wife gave ₹13,50,000 for purchasing a flat in which the couple resided with their 3-year-old son;That the husband inflicted some wounds on himself to show that the wife had assaulted him;That he retained jewellery worth ₹4,20,000.On the basis of these allegations, an FIR was registered against the husband for offence under Section 498A (cruelty by husband and in-laws) under Indian Penal Code and offences under the Dowry Prohibition Act..The husband meanwhile made counter-allegations:That he spent ₹90,00,00 by raising loan for the flat;That after the marriage he had taken his wife to Mauritius and also gifted her an expensive cell phone;That there are Whatsapp chats of how he was constantly harassed by his wife;That there was a complaint lodged by him against her, and her FIR was a counter blast against the same..After considering submissions by both parties, the Court came to the conclusion that the husband’s custody will not solve the issue.“Even for the purpose of investigation his custodial interrogation is not necessary. He can be asked to co- operate with the investigating agency. There are allegations and counter allegations, which can only be decided during the trial,” Justice Kotwal emphasized in the order.He directed the police to release the husband on bail in the event of arrest on his furnishing a bail bond of ₹30,000 with one or more sureties..[Read Order]