Delhi HC grants divorce to husband citing false allegations, persistent police threats by wife
text_fields
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court granted a divorce to a man, stating that false allegations made by his wife and the constant threat of being summoned to a police station amounted to cruelty and severely impacted the man's mental well-being.
The decision came in response to the man's appeal against a 2019 family court order that denied him a divorce on grounds of "cruelty and desertion" under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The division bench, comprising of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, emphasized the mental toll that frequent visits to a police station can take on an individual. The court likened the experience to a "Damocles Sword" hanging over the man's head, as he faced the uncertainty of potential registration of a criminal case and subsequent arrest.
The bench noted that the wife's actions included filing a police complaint accusing her husband and his family of cruelty. However, the court found it peculiar that she did not file any case against her own father-in-law despite alleging a serious incident. The allegations were deemed questionable, as the incident in question had not been mentioned again after the initial complaint.
The court also highlighted a previous police complaint filed by the woman in 2007, which resulted in the husband and his family being acquitted in 2017 due to a lack of evidence. The court deemed this as a "clear and categorical character assassination" of the husband and his family members.
The couple had been living separately for nearly 17 years, a circumstance the court considered as a valid ground for divorce, citing a Supreme Court ruling. The High Court stressed that when a marriage has irreparably broken down and there has been a prolonged period of separation, it would be unrealistic for the law to ignore such facts.
The court stated that the marriage had become fictional and dissolving it was the most sensible decision for both parties.
The ruling took into account that living together was no longer a reasonable expectation for the couple. The court believed that not granting the divorce would be detrimental to both parties, as it would eliminate the possibility of them moving on emotionally and psychologically to begin anew.
