The Court was hearing an appeal moved by a wife whose husband’s divorce plea was allowed by the family court on July 12.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently ruled that a wife calling her husband “Hijda” (transgender) amounts to mental cruelty. A Division Bench, comprising Justice Sudhir Singh and Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi, heard the wife’s appeal against the divorce decree granted to her husband by a family court on July 12. The husband’s mother testified that the wife often referred to her son as a “Hijda.”
“If the findings recorded by the learned Family Court, are examined in the light of the … judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it comes out that the acts and conduct of the appellant-wife amounts to cruelty. Firstly, terming the respondent-husband as Hijda (transgender) and calling his mother to have given birth to a transgender, is an act of cruelty,” the Bench said.
The couple married in December 2017. In his divorce petition, the husband alleged that his wife would stay up late and demand his ailing mother bring her meals from the ground floor to the first floor. He also accused her of being addicted to pornography and mobile games. Additionally, the husband claimed that his wife insisted on timing their sexual activity, expecting it to last 10-15 minutes per session and occur at least three times a night. She allegedly mocked him for not being “physically fit enough to satisfy her” and had expressed a desire to marry someone else. In her response, the wife denied these claims and asserted that her husband had forced her out of their matrimonial home.
She also claimed that her in-laws had drugged her, causing her to lose consciousness, during which they placed a talisman from a Tantrik around her neck and gave her intoxicating water to control her. In her appeal, she argued that the family court had wrongly based its finding of cruelty on the testimonies of her husband and his mother. She further contended that her accusations of being drugged were unjustly dismissed as self-serving.
The High Court noted that the wife’s allegations were unfounded, as she failed to call her parents or any close relatives to testify about her claims of cruelty. Furthermore, the Court highlighted that her domestic violence petition against her husband had been dismissed by the trial court. It also emphasized that there was no evidence in the record showing that this ruling had been overturned by a higher court on appeal or revision.
“Considering the overall acts and conduct of the appellant-wife and further considering that the parties had been living separately for the last six years, it was rightly found by the learned family court that the marriage between the parties has ruptured beyond repair and it has become a dead wood,” the Court further said.
The Court also remarked that the couple had been living separately for six years, with no possibility of reconciliation. Consequently, it upheld the family court’s decision to terminate the marriage and dismissed the wife’s appeal.
