Ambika bhardwaj
Published On: January 29, 2022 at 17:47 IST
The Kerala High Court in the Case of Mary Margaret v Jos P Thomas ruled that matrimonial cruelty to justify Divorce must have a uniform definition regardless of Personal Laws.
A Division Bench of Justices A Muhamed Mustaque and Sophy Thomas stated that irrespective of whether personal laws involve or exclude some definitions of cruelty, the Law cannot acknowledge different types of cruelty on the basis of religion.
The Court also took inspiration from Article 44 (Uniform Civil Code) to reach this conclusion.
Notably, the Court mentioned that it does not agree with the theory that what constitutes cruelty in granting Divorce can differ for people of different religions.
The Judgement stated the following-
“We reject the theory that the notion of matrimonial cruelty to entitle a spouse for Divorce can be dissimilar and differ for people of different religions just because different words are there in the relevant Personal Law Statutes.”
As a result, the Court concluded that matrimonial cruelty must be defined uniformly in order to justify the establishment of a Decree for Divorce.
According to Section 10(1)(x) of the Divorce Act, the cruelty must be such that the Petitioner has a reasonable fear that living with the Respondent would be harmful or injurious.
The Court further stated that the term “harmful or injurious” cannot be limited to physical harm or injury.
The Court issued its decision in response to an Appeal lodged by a wife against a Family Court Decree that granted Divorce on the husband’s application on the grounds of cruelty and desertion against her.
The husband’s main allegation was that his wife displayed behavioural disorders that frequently turned violent and abusive from the beginning of their marriage. He also asserted that his wife was not concerned about the children and that she had been living at her paternal home and ignoring their children since 2005.
He argued that despite being taken to numerous psychologists and psychiatrists, the wife refused to cooperate or complete any course of treatment.
The Court relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Samar Ghosh v Jaya Ghosh, which mentioned the nature and scope of mental cruelty as a ground for Divorce.
Hence, the Court rejected the wife’s Appeal.