The Court further noted that wife moving away from company of husband and levelling false allegations of illicit relationships as a cover up, would also constitute cruelty.
The Karnataka High Court recently ruled that wife humiliating her husband by calling him dark-skinned amounts to cruelty.
The Court further noted that the wife’s decision to distance herself from the company of her husband and to level false allegations against him of having illicit relationships to cover up this aspect, was cruel.
A bench of Justice Alok Aradhe and Anant Ramanath Hegde made the observation while allowing a husband’s plea for divorce.
“The evidence on record, from close scrutiny also leads to the conclusion that the wife used to insult the husband on the premise that he is dark. And for the same reason has moved away from the company of the husband without any cause. And to cover up this aspect, has levelled false allegations of illicit relationships against the husband. These facts certainly will constitute cruelty,” the Court said.
The Court was dealing with an appeal filed by the husband contesting the decision of a family court in Bengaluru to dismiss his plea for the dissolution of his marriage under Section 13(i)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
The husband had filed for divorce in 2012. In his plea, he claimed that the wife consistently demeaned him based on his skin color.
Additionally, it was alleged by the husband that in 2011, his wife lodged a “false” complaint against him and his family members, citing cruelty under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. He further claimed that his wife had left him to reside with her parents.
The wife refuted the allegations and asserted that her husband had engaged in an extramarital affair with another woman. She further contended that her husband had subjected her to physical abuse and that her treatment by his family was unsatisfactory.
The Court, however, found that there was no acceptable evidence on record to accept the wife’s allegation that her husband was having an illicit relationship with another lady. The Court, therefore, concluded that these allegations were reckless, and baseless.
The Court proceeded to hold that the family court failed to take into account the impact of such groundless and careless accusations concerning the husband’s character.
The Court also took into consideration the fact that the wife was pursuing multiple legal cases against the husband and his family and there was no communication between the husband and wife for several years.
“When the question has been put to the wife in the cross-examination, whether she is willing to join the company of the husband, the wife though has stated that she is willing to join the company, has stated that she is not willing to withdraw any of the complaints filed against the husband and his family members. This fact would clearly establish that the wife is not willing to join the company of the husband and there is a big rift between the husband and the wife,” the Court observed.
As such, the Court concluded that the husband’s allegations of cruelty were duly established. Therefore, it allowed the husband’s plea to dissolve his marriage and granted a decree of divorce.
