Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Plea, Citing Failure to Prove Cruelty and Contradictory Testimonies
Case No: F.A. No. 174 of 2024
By Sandhya kaika
The High Court of Jharkhand has dismissed an appeal filed by a husband, Ravi Kumar, seeking a divorce from his wife, Diwa Sinha, on the grounds of cruelty under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Division Bench, comprising Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Arun Kumar Rai, upheld the lower court’s decision, noting that the husband failed to establish the alleged “perversity” or cruelty in his wife’s conduct.
Case Background
The couple married in January 2019, but the husband alleged that from the outset, his wife displayed “peculiar” and “critical” behavior. His claims included her expressing regret over career sacrifices, showing disrespect during a Holi festival, and eventually deserting him in August 2021. He further alleged physical assault and threats of suicide by the respondent.
The Wife’s Defense
The respondent-wife denied all allegations, contending that she was the one subjected to mental and physical torture due to dowry demands. She claimed her father bore all marriage and travel expenses and even provided cash to the husband to save their conjugal life. Notably, she expressed a desire to continue the matrimonial relationship for the sake of their minor son.
Court’s Observations
The Court highlighted several critical points in its judgment:
Contradictory Evidence: The husband’s own testimony during cross-examination contradicted his initial claims. While he alleged immediate discord in his petition, he admitted in court that relations were “normal” and “cordial” for several weeks following the marriage, including during their honeymoon.
Lack of Proof: The Court noted that the husband failed to produce any documentary evidence to support his claims of cruelty.
Refutation of Specific Incidents: Evidence presented by the wife, including Holi photographs showing the couple in a “smiling mood,” directly refuted the husband’s claims of ill-treatment during the festival.
Wife’s Intent: The Court observed that the wife only filed cases for domestic violence and dowry harassment after the husband initiated divorce proceedings, supporting her claim that she initially sought to maintain the marriage.
Final Verdict
Concluding that the husband appeared to be taking advantage of his own wrongs, the Court ruled that “cruelty” as a ground for divorce was not established. The appeal was dismissed, affirming that minor marital disputes do not constitute sufficient grounds for the dissolution of marriage
