Both parties have filed criminal cases against each other – Allahabad HC dissolves the marriage and awards maintenance of Rs 1 crore to the wife

The Allahabad HC on Friday dissolved the marriage and awarded maintenance of Rs 1 crore to the woman.

The bank of Justices Saumitra Dayal Singh and Arun Kumar Singh Deswal dealt with the appeal against the order of the Family Court rejecting the appellant’s application under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for annulment of the marriage of the appellant and the respondent.

In this case, the appellant/husband filed an application under Section 13(1) of the 1955 Act for dissolution of the marriage of the appellant and the respondent/wife. This request was granted unilaterally by order and the parties’ marriage was dissolved.

After learning of the aforementioned unilateral divorce decree, the defendant filed a motion for recall, which was granted. The ex parte order was withdrawn by order and the divorce petition was restored under its original number. Afterwards, the defendant also submitted her written statement in which she rejected the accusation of the divorce petition.

The family judge rejected the applicant’s divorce petition on the grounds that the applicant could not prove cruelty to the respondent.

The Court observed that although the appellant could not clearly prove the cruelty on the part of the respondent in his daily life till the filing of a divorce petition, the same fact is also undisputed as the respondent had filed a case under Section 498A. 420 506 and 507 IPC in 2014 before the plaintiff filed the divorce petition. Although the police had filed a chargesheet under Section 420 IPC in this case and Section 498A IPC was deleted, the court concerned subsequently acquitted the complainant under Section 420 IPC as well. Similarly, in the case under Section 377 IPC, which the respondent had filed during the pendency of the divorce petition, the police had submitted a final report.

The Supreme Court said both parties had initiated criminal proceedings against each other and had serious disputes over the properties. Apart from this, both parties also make allegations against each other that they are having an extra-marital relationship and therefore forcing them to live together despite their intense hatred for each other would be akin to cruelty.

also read

The court held that although the respondent may not claim the cruelty she suffered, this fate should not be imposed on the complainant. For him, cruelty remains an available and established reason to seek dissolution of the marriage. This cruelty is certain. It is also clear that the marriage between the parties had irretrievably failed and there is no longer any chance of living together again.

The Supreme Court referred the case Dr. Nirmal Singh Panesar v. Paramjit Kaur Panesar It said, “One should be oblivious to the fact that the institution of marriage occupies an important place and plays an important role in the society.” Despite the increasing trend of filing divorce cases in the courts, the institution of marriage in India Society still viewed as a pious, spiritual and invaluable emotional web of life between husband and wife. It is subject not only to legal texts, but also to social norms. So many other relationships emerge from and thrive on marital relationships in society. Therefore, it would not be desirable to accept the formula of “irretrievable breakdown of marriage” as a straitjacket formula for granting divorce relief under Article 142 of the Constitution of India.”

In view of the above, the Court allowed the appeal and directed the husband to pay Rs.1,00,00,000 (One Crore) to the respondent for permanent maintenance within three months.

Case title: Ashok Jha v. Pratibha Jha

Bank: Justices Saumitra Dayal Singh and Arun Kumar Singh Deswal

Case No.: FIRST COMPLAINT No. – 149 of 2020

Complainant’s lawyer: Rahul Sahai and Rajeev Kumar