The ruling is seen as a significant relief for husbands entangled in long-drawn legal disputes stemming from false matrimonial allegations
In a landmark decision, the Gurugram District Court has admitted a ₹1.80 crore damages suit filed by a UK-based man against his ex-wife, who had earlier filed a false dowry complaint against him. The order, issued on August 13, 2025, by Civil Judge (Senior Division) Manish Kumar, marks an important move toward curbing the misuse of matrimonial laws.
The plaintiff, Gurusharam Lal Awasthi, had previously been acquitted of charges under Sections 498A (cruelty), 406 (criminal breach of trust), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code—first by a trial court in 2016 and later upheld by a sessions court in 2018. After his acquittal, Awasthi filed a civil suit against his former wife for malicious prosecution, seeking damages for the financial losses and mental anguish he suffered over a 16-year-long legal battle.
Notably, Awasthi was granted a divorce by a UK court in 2020. However, neither he nor his wife sought formal recognition of the decree in India. Under Indian law, a foreign divorce decree is not automatically valid unless it fulfills certain conditions—such as both parties submitting to the foreign court’s jurisdiction and the decree being based on grounds recognized by Indian matrimonial law. In the absence of such recognition, the marriage continues to subsist under Indian legal provisions.
On August 13, the plaintiff’s former wife contested the suit, arguing that it was not maintainable since an appeal challenging Awasthi’s acquittal was still pending before the High Court. Her counsel also claimed that the appropriate court fee had not been deposited. Rejecting these arguments, the court held that the mere pendency of a revision petition does not nullify an acquittal and further clarified that a provisional court fee is permissible in cases involving unquantified damages.
“The plaint, on its face, discloses a valid cause of action for malicious prosecution,” observed Judge Manish Kumar, noting that the ex-wife’s claim that the suit was “false and fabricated” could only be examined during the trial. The matter has been adjourned to November 20, 2025, for the filing of a written statement.
Speaking to Hindustan Times, Awasthi described his prolonged ordeal: “My marriage lasted just seven days, but I spent 40 days in jail and 16 years in court. They demanded ₹1.20 crore to settle, but I refused. My passport was seized for three years — I couldn’t work or travel, and my family endured immense hardship. My father died due to continuous police harassment. The damage to my dignity and life cannot be quantified.”
Women’s rights activist and documentary filmmaker Deepika Narayan Bhardwaj, who supported Awasthi throughout his legal battle, welcomed the verdict. “This is a praiseworthy judgment — it gives hope to countless men wrongfully accused in dowry cases. Despite facing immense emotional, financial, and personal hardships, he remained steadfast. His perseverance may inspire others to seek justice through malicious prosecution cases,” she said.
Legal experts noted that the ruling signifies the judiciary’s increasing recognition of the misuse of dowry provisions and could serve as a deterrent against frivolous or vindictive complaints in matrimonial disputes.
Sharing her perspective, Ambika Yadav, a senior advocate at the Gurugram district court, observed that the ruling could establish a significant precedent. “For years, courts have been reluctant to admit civil suits for malicious prosecution in matrimonial disputes. By allowing this case to proceed despite a pending appeal, the court has reaffirmed that an acquittal constitutes valid grounds to seek compensation. This decision sends a strong message that the misuse of criminal law will not be condoned and opens the door for others in similar circumstances to pursue justice,” she stated.
