The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that prolonged separation, absence of cohabitation, irreparable breakdown of the relationship, and hostility between spouses constitute ‘cruelty’ under Section 13(1)(a) of the 1955 Act.
“Where the marital relationship has broken down irretrievably, where there is a long separation and absence of cohabitation (as in the present case for the last 12 years), then continuation of such marriage would only mean giving sanction to cruelty with each is inflicting on the other”, a bench of Justice Anand Pathak and Justice Hirdesh remarked while granting divorce to a husband.
The Court affirmed the husband’s appeal against the family court’s dismissal of his petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, in which he sought a divorce on the grounds of cruelty, concealment of the respondent’s mental condition, and desertion.
The case in brief
The appellant-husband sought a divorce from the respondent-wife, claiming that their marriage, which was solemnized in February 2008, was adversely affected by the wife’s mental health issues. He alleged that she exhibited irrational behaviour, including hearing voices, experiencing hallucinations, and losing her ability to reason.
Despite attempts to address her condition, including seeking help from her parents, the husband stated there was no improvement. After the birth of their two children, the wife was taken to her parents’ home in June 2012, but her condition remained unchanged for the following five years.
As a result, the husband filed for divorce in the Family Court on the grounds of cruelty and desertion, asserting that her condition caused him humiliation and mental distress. The Family Court proceeded ex parte against the respondent due to her absence but dismissed the appellant’s divorce petition in January 2018.
Upon hearing the appeal, the division bench noted that the respondent had been living separately from the appellant since 2012 and had not contested the evidence presented by the appellant regarding her abnormal behavior. Consequently, there was no reason to question the appellant-husband’s testimony.
The Court emphasized the appellant’s account, which detailed the wife-respondent claiming that someone was following and spying on her, hearing screams, and seeing a woman’s body—events that had not actually occurred.
According to the appellant, her erratic and irrational behavior disrupted his life. She would stay awake at night, wander around, speak incessantly, and sometimes forget to wear proper clothing. She would also throw objects and had lost her ability to think, remember, or reason.
The Court further observed that the couple had been living separately since 2012, with their marital bond completely broken and irreparable. It concluded that continuing the relationship amounted to cruelty for both parties, and thus, the marriage must come to an end.
“The long separation, absence of cohabitation, the complete breakdown of all meaningful bonds and the existing bitterness between the two, has to be read cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the 1955 Act,” the Court observed.
In view of these circumstances, the Court found that the Family Court erred in dismissing the appellant’s divorce petition by ignoring the unrebutted evidence. Consequently, the impugned judgment and decree of the Family Court in Gwalior were overturned. The appeal was allowed, the appellant’s divorce petition was granted, and the marriage between the appellant and the respondent was dissolved.
However, taking into account the appellant’s occupation as a laborer and the financial situation of both parties, the Court ordered the husband to pay Rs. 2 lakhs to the respondent-wife as permanent alimony.