Failure To Prove Allegations In A Criminal Complaint Per Se Cannot Be Ground To Infer That Wife Caused Mental Cruelty To Husband: Madras HC
The Madras High Court held that failure to prove allegations in a criminal complaint per se cannot be a ground to infer that the wife caused mental cruelty to her husband.
The husband had filed for a diverse petition under Section 13(1), (i-a) and (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA). The family court dissolved the marriage and being aggrieved by the same, the wife appealed before the High Court. During the pendency of the appeal, the husband married another lady which the Court deemed as “illegal and void in the light of Section 15 HMA.”
A Division Bench of Justice G. Jayachandran and Justice C. Kumarappan observed, “In the present case, the allegations of suspicion, refusal to have cohabitation and voluntary withdrawal from the matrimonial relationship are all due to the contribution by the respondent/husband and he cannot take advantage of his own misconduct, coupled with the fact that his conduct of solemnizing another marriage knowingfully when there is an appeal pending, also makes this Court to reverse the findings of the Family Court and allow the appeal. ”
Advocate R. Ramanujam represented the appellant, while Advocate A. Prasanna Rajadurai appeared for the respondent.
The Court found that it was the conduct of the husband which forced the wife to leave his company and live separately stating that “it is not a voluntary act, but an act of compulsion and force and also threat of life.”
The Court explained that failure to prove criminal allegations cannot be a ground to infer that the wife had caused mental cruelty to the husband. “It is a legal right and remedy available for the wife, who had been subjected to cruelty,” noted the Court.
“Since under the criminal law, the proof of guilt to be beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, the acquittal ordered, it does not mean that the wife, who is alleged to have suffered cruelty, had caused cruelty to the husband. It all depends upon the facts of each case,” held the Court.
Accordingly, the High Court set aside the order of the family court and allowed the appeal.
Cause Title: Revathi v. Anburajan
Appearance:
Appellant: Advocates R. Ramanujam and J. Karthikeyan
Respondent: Advocate A. Prasanna Rajadurai
