Criminal Cases By Wife To Embarrass & Incarcerate Husband & His Family Members Is Mental Cruelty: Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that the criminal cases filed by wife to embarrass and incarcerate the husband and his family members is mental cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA).

The Court held thus in an Appeal filed by a wife against the Decree of Divorce passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge under Section 13(1)(ia)(ib) of the HMA.

A Division Bench of Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari and Justice Challa Gunaranjan observed, “Mental cruelty cause much serious injury than physical harm. The criminal cases filed by wife to embarrass and incarcerate the husband and his family members cause persistent trauma, humiliation in social circle which amount to mental cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of H.M.Act, and particularly when in reality they are not guilty and so acquitted. Such can only be imagined by others.”

The Bench enunciated that it is difficult to prove mental cruelty and, therefore, the normal rule which governs the criminal proceedings is that it is proved by a preponderance of probabilities and not beyond reasonable doubt.

Advocate Rama Rao Kochiri appeared for the Appellant/Wife while Advocate Lakshminarayana Reddy appeared for the Respondent/Husband.

Factual Background

The Respondent-husband had filed a pleading inter alia that the Appellant was his legally wedded wife. The marriage was solemnized as per Hindu rites, caste, and custom in 1994. The husband was working as Lecturer in a coaching centre and the wife had completed graduation and was staying with her parents. The marriage was allegedly without any dowry, however, three days after the marriage, the wife told that the marriage was against her wish and will. It was alleged that the wife started behaving abnormally and after few days of marriage on the pretext to attend duty, she went back to Tirupati. It was further alleged that for short spells she stayed in the matrimonial home, but her behaviour caused frustration and mental agony to the husband.

There was no cohabitation between them and the wife allegedly did not attend even the normal works as wife. The husband narrated many incidents to point out his mental agony and the cruelty by the wife. The mediations, held by the elders failed, as she allegedly demanded huge amount of money. Consequently, the husband had no option but to take divorce. The wife filed counter and denied the averments of cruelty. She pleaded taking dowry by the husband and its more demand on number of occasions. She also pleaded harassment and ill-treatment by the husband. The Trial recorded that the relationship between the parties was beyond melting point which could not be got down by any means. It granted divorce and allowed the husband’s plea. Being aggrieved, the wife was before the High Court.

Reasoning

The High Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, said, “… the mental cruelty is a state of mind, the feeling of deep anguish, disappointment, frustration in one spouse caused by the conduct of other. The ill-conduct must be persistent for a fairly lengthy period, where the relationship has deteriorated to an extent that because of the acts and behaviour of a spouse, the wronged party finds it extremely difficult to live with the other party any longer.”

The Court was of the view that the act and conduct of the wife in filing the Criminal Complaint under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) against the husband and his parents in which they had to obtain bail and were finally acquitted as the allegations were not proved was a conduct causing mental cruelty, and agony to the husband.

“It amounted to mental cruelty and furnished a ground for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the H.M.Act. … Additionally, the parties are living for the last 29 years separately and before that they lived together for short period as is clear from the pleadings of the parties”, it added.

The Court further noted that though the wife has expressed her willingness by filing an Affidavit that she is willing to live with the husband but the husband has also filed the Affidavit that the wife harassed him and his parents by lodging a false complaint in which, there was acquittal, but that caused the mental agony to him and to the entire family.

“The parties are living separately for last 29 years and there is no chance for reunion. In his evidence also as P.W.1, the husband deposed to that effect that in view of false implication in criminal case, reunion is not possible. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the period of long separation coupled with the affidavit of the husband. We are in agreement with the view taken by the learned trial court that now it is not possible for the parties to lead a matrimonial life together”, it observed.

The Court concluded that when the ground for divorce on cruelty was made out, reversal of the decree would add agony to the parties.

“The relationship is beyond repair. The marriage has become a fiction. … In view of the above considerations, we hold on Point-A that the ground of ‘cruelty’ under Section 13(1)(ia) of H.M.Act was established to grant divorce. We hold on Point No.B that there is no illegality in the decree of divorce granted by the learned Trial Court. The same calls for no interference and is affirmed”, it also remarked.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Appeal and upheld the divorce decree.

Cause Title- ABC v. XYZ (Case Number: C.M.A.No.693 OF 2006)

Click here to read/download the Judgment