Bombay High Court: No Divorce to a man on Grounds of Cruelty and Desertion against Wife

Akanksha Singh-

Bombay High Court refuses to grant the divorce to a 44-year-old engineer alleging cruelty and abandonment against his wife. This decision came after his wife refused to join him in India to divorce him.

It was observed that the decision of the wife to stay in Canada was that she had settled with the couple son’s, is not ‘unjustified’ or ‘selfish’.

Basically, in this case, the husband is claiming that his wife wants to settle in Canada along with their son and when the husband tried to visit Canada, his wife refused to meet him. He also stated that she didn’t even let him meet his son. 

He also claimed that the family of his wife had threatened him to return her passport, documents and jewellery. After that, the husband approached the Court for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Then he eventually filed for divorce as his wife didn’t appear in the earlier proceedings.

The Court represents the women’s resume, details of her thriving career with a pharmaceutical company in Canada to note that the husband may be reunited with his wife, especially since it was the idea of the husband to settle in Canada in the first place.

Thus, a bench consisting of Justice Ujjwal Bhuyan and Prithviraj Chavan refused the appeal of the husband against the order of the Family Court dismissing his plea for divorce under section 13(1)(ia) i.e. cruelty and section 13(1)(ib) i.e. desertion of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

“This being the status of the respondent (wife), it would not be justified, in any way, expecting her to return to this country when she is already well settled over there…The desire of the respondent(wife) to settle in Canada is actuated by the fact that it was the appellant (husband) who had first consciously decided to settle in the foreign country. As such, the wish of the respondent cannot be branded as an act of selfishness or the act on her part cannot be said to be unjustified. Thus, in no way, it could be said to be cruelty meted out to the appellant by the deserting spouse,” – said the bench.

It was further noted by the bench that the husband failed to provide any medical certificates to ratify his claims when he cited his ill health for not joining his wife back in Canada.

The final judgment cited by the Court was of Samar Ghosh Vs. Jaya Ghosh, to observe that the couple’s relationship hadn’t deteriorated to such an extent that it would be impossible for them to unite.

Thus, the bench held that the marriage of the couple has not reached such a bad state that it is beyond repair, especially since their son is still young and there may be a bond between the couple to reunite once again. 

Related Post