Suicide Attempt & Publicly Defaming Husband Is Mental Cruelty: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Wife’s Plea For Restitution Of Conjugal Rights

The wife attempted suicide. She distributed posters publicly, claiming the husband was missing and she also raised multiple allegations of cruelty against the husband.

A Bench of Justice Sanjeev Thaker emphasized that while deciding applications for restitution of conjugal rights, courts must evaluate the overall conduct of the parties and the circumstances surrounding the marital discord.

The Court noted that the wife had admitted to attempting suicide, which, according to the judge, constitutes an act of emotional manipulation and coercion. The Court added, "Moreover, while granting a restitution of conjugal rights the Court will also have to take into consideration the conduct of the spouse and the grounds for refusing the restitution of the conjugal rights has to be taken into consideration while deciding the same. In the present case, the Appellant has admitted that she tried to commit suicide. This naturally amounts to an extreme and coercive behaviour with an intention to emotionally manipulate and mentally distress the Respondent".

The wife had challenged the concurrent findings of the lower courts, arguing that she had been denied her marital rights and entry into her matrimonial home. She also stated that after requesting her husband to stay with her post-marriage, she was forced to file a complaint when he refused.

However, the husband submitted that her attempt to commit suicide and her public defamation through posters had made cohabitation impossible.

The Court further observed that in a marital relationship, both partners are expected to nurture their bond with compassion and understanding, even during disagreements. The Court added, “The effect of such behaviour leaves a lasting scar on the mental health and emotional stability of the aggrieved spouse coupled with public humiliation as seen in the present case of printing posters of the husband and such acts cannot be brushed aside as such threats become tools of coercion and forcing the Respondent to remain trapped in the stated of perpetual anxiety and emotional paralysis, as such conduct crosses the boundaries of personal conflict and touches upon the very core of harassment which makes it impossible for husband in the present to continue leading a peaceful and dignified marital life. The attempt to commit suicide itself shows the charge situation in which the parties were residing.”

The Court rejected any suggestion that the husband had condoned his wife’s conduct. It ruled that suicide attempts cannot be casually treated or presumed to have been forgiven. The Court said, "Moreover, cruelty in the nature of suicide attempts is something which cannot be loosely be argued to have been condoned in any manner. Mental cruelty arising from suicide attempts cannot fall in the same bag as any other alleged mental cruelty."

These actions, taken together, were found sufficient to establish that the husband had a reasonable excuse to withdraw from the society of the wife, as provided under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

The High Court, agreeing with the findings of the lower courts, held that there was no substantial question of law raised in the wife’s appeal and accordingly dismissed it.

Cause Title: X v. Y, [2025:GUJHC:26861]

Appearance:

Appellant: Advocates YH Motiramani, Divyesh G Nimavat

Respondent: Advocate Vishvesh R. Acharya

Click here to read/download Judgment