Questioning paternity of children is cruelty against wife: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court recently held that a father’s refusal to accept the legitimacy/paternity of children and making unsubstantiated allegations of extra-marital affair against wife is an act of mental cruelty against the wife..A Division Bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna referred to a Supreme Court judgement and said that such allegations constitute grave assault on character, honour and reputation and is the worst form of cruelty.“Such unsubstantiated assertions, being of a quality which cause mental pain, agony and suffering are sufficient by itself to amount to the reformulated concept of cruelty in matrimonial law,” the Court said.It, therefore, upheld the a family court rejecting the husband's plea for divorce and rejected the man's appeal against the same. “The learned Family Judge has rightly observed that levelling of disgusting allegations of unchastity and indecent familiarity with a person outside wedlock and allegations of extra marital relationship, constitute grave assault on the character, honour, reputation, status as well as mental health of the spouse. Such scandalous, unsubstantiated aspersions of perfidiousness attributed to the spouse and not even sparing the children, would amount to worst form of insult and cruelty, sufficient by disentitle the appellant from seeking divorce. This is one case where the appellant has himself committed the wrong and cannot be granted the benefit of divorce,” the High Court said. .It was the man’s case that he met his wife (respondent) in September 2004 and got married the next year.He said that woman had pressured him to marry her after she established sexual relations with him when he was drunk and subsequently told him that she was pregnant.The appellant-husband further alleged that the wife threatened to commit suicide and had illicit relationships with many men..After considering the case, the Court rejected the allegations made by the husband.It noted that the appellant, after having left his service, failed to take responsibility of the family and the respondent-wife was left to not only suffer the financial burden, but had to struggle to take care of the children and the household responsibilities.The Court ruled that the husband was not able to prove any of his allegations made against the wife.“He has made vague and general allegations regarding threats to commit suicide and implication in criminal cases. As discussed above, it is the respondent who has been subjected to cruelty and not the appellant.”.The Court, therefore, dismissed the plea.Advocates Juhi Arora and Saral Arora represented the appellant husband.Wife was represented by advocate Karmanya Singh Choudhary. .[Read Judgment]