Wife slandering, defaming husband is cruelty: Bombay HC

Mumbai: A wife defaming her husband, calling him a "womaniser" and "alcoholic", without solid proof adds to "cruelty", Bombay High Court ruled.

Upholding the November 2005 divorce order by a Pune family court of the couple in the case it was hearing, a division bench of Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice Sharmila Deshmukh observed so. The husband was a retired army major but died during the pendency of the case, and the wife is a 50-year-old woman.

The woman, who had made the legal heirs of her husband party in the case, claimed that her late husband was a "womaniser" and an "alcoholic", and due to these vices, she was deprived of her conjugal rights.

The husband's counsel submitted before the court that the petitioner had caused mental agony by making such false and defamatory allegations against him, including before the members of a social institution where he was doing social work.

The court accepted that and said in its order that the woman making unwarranted and false allegations against her husband's character ended in defaming his name and damaging his reputation, which was cruelty. The court also noted that she could not produce any evidence to prove the claims other than her what she said.

The bench also referred to the husband's deposition in the family court in which he stated that his wife had separated him from his children and grandchildren and how her "unwarranted, false, and baseless" allegations resulted in shredding his reputation in society.

The court continued that "cruelty" is broadly defined as conduct that inflicts upon the other party such mental pain and suffering to make it impossible for them to live with each other, and it was a fit case for granting the divorce.

When the husband had moved to the Pune family court seeking divorce on the grounds of mental agony inflicted by his wife, he was granted the same in 2005. However, the wife challenged it in the high court later.