Wife Filing False Cases Of Domestic Violence Amounts To Cruelty: Patna HC

In the present matter, subsequent to a matrimonial discord the wife had alleged that her husband had illicit relations with different persons outside the wedlock. She had further alleged that her husband and his mother were involved in adultery and fornication etc.

Accordingly, a bench of Justice P. B. Bajanthri, and Justice Ramesh Chand observed, “The Family Court has failed to appreciate the aforementioned issues of initiation of criminal proceedings, domestic violence and giving complaint to appellant’s employer which has tarnished the image of the appellant at his working place. Character assassination of adultery, fornication and alleging that appellant and his mother are involved in soliciting prostitution. These are the elements of cruelty and it has hurt mentally to the appellant. The Family Court has not taken note of the fact that respondent’s intention was not to join her husband in the light of three cases initiated against her husband and she has admitted certain allegations made in the litigations were at the instigation of her Advocate”.

While further considering the fact that the allegations were at the instigation, the bench was of the opinion that she should have withdrawn, however, till date she didn’t make any effort to withdraw. The Court was of the opinion that that the wife adhered to the arm twisting method instead of resolving the matter. If it is so, she should have immediately shown concern in withdrawing those allegations. Even to this day, she has not made any efforts to withdraw those allegations. In other words, she has adhered to the arm twisting method instead of resolving in a polite manner.

“The leveling of false allegation by one spouse to the other having alleged illicit relations with different persons outside the wedlock amounted to mental cruelty. In the present case, respondent – wife alleged allegations before the employer of appellant and in the domestic violence allegations of soliciting prostitution by appellant and his mother and appellant involved in adultery and fornication etc. Respondent admitted those allegations are at the instigation of her advocate and they are not true. Social torture by anyone of the spouses to the other, found to be as the mental torture and cruelty. Respondent harassing appellant in filing false cases of domestic violence and she has admitted certain allegations are false and such behaviour amounts to cruelty. It is also sufficient that if the cruelty is of such type that it becomes impossible for spouses to live together. Therefore, it is a marriage irretrievably broken down during the period from 04.06.2015 to this day in the light of institution of criminal proceedings, domestic violence and complaint to the employer”.

Advocate Ankit Katriar appeared for the appellant and Advocate Nikhil Kumar Agrawal appeared for the respondent.

The present matter pertained a matrimonial discord, criminal proceedings were initiated under Section 498 A IPC and allied Sections against the husband, while the wife had also filed a domestic violence case, and had filed complaint against her husband before his employer to take disciplinary action and remove him from service.

She had also made serious allegations about the character of the husband and against his mother in the domestic violence complaint.

Pursuant to which, the husband filed matrimonial (divorce) case under Section 13 1(ia) 1(ib) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. However, the Principal Judge, Family Court declined the appellant’s petition.

It was the case of the appellant that the Family Court failed to appreciate cruelty meted out to him.

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances in the present matter, the bench was thus of the opinion, “Gist of allegations in all the three petitions, it is evident that they amount to cruelty. Therefore, the Family Court has committed error in dismissing…Thus, appellant has made out a prima facie case so as to grant decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty”.

However, considering the fact that the appellant - husband is Deputy Executive Engineer, Maharashtra State Power Generation Corporation Limited, a holder of the post of Class I Officer and must be well paid, the bench directed him to pay an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs) to the respondent – wife as an interim alimony.

Cause Title: X vs Y