Wife's Denial of Cohabitation and Failed Section 498-A Case Amount to Cruelty: Rajasthan High Court Grants Divorce

The parties married on 29.04.2004 and have a daughter (para 2). The husband sought divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, alleging cruelty, threats of suicide, desertion, denial of cohabitation and a criminal case lodged by the wife under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC (para 2). The wife denied this, alleged beating and dowry demands, and said she was ready to live with him (para 3). On 02.09.2015 a Rewari magistrate acquitted the husband in the criminal case (para 7). The Additional District Judge No. 1, Kishangarhbas (Alwar), dismissed the divorce application on 12.09.2018, and the husband appealed under Section 28 (paras 1, 6).

Relying on Rakesh Raman v. Kavita, the Bench noted that cruelty may be mental, that a unilateral refusal of intercourse for a considerable period may amount to mental cruelty, and that long, continuous separation and complete breakdown can be read as cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) (para 11). Under Narasimha Sastry v. Suneela Rani, merely lodging a complaint is not cruelty, but a husband who undergoes trial under Section 498-A and is acquitted has suffered cruelty (para 12). Parveen Mehta v. Inderjit Mehta set out the general test (para 13). In cross-examination, the wife admitted there had been no cohabitation after the first year of marriage, and the husband said she had denied it since 2005; this denial amounted to cruelty (paras 16-17). Relying on the acquittal judgment (Ex. 4), the Bench held that lodging a false criminal case against the husband amounted to cruelty (para 18). The parties had lived separately since 2010 with no chance of reunion, so asking them to live together would be cruelty to both (para 19). The trial court's finding on cruelty was therefore perverse (para 20).