Refusing to put on veil in public not cruelty: Allahabad HC in divorce case

The Allahabad High Court has refused to grant a man divorce on the grounds that his wife had committed cruelty because she would not put on pardah or veil in public.

But Justices Saumitra Dayal Singh and Donadi Ramesh allowed for the dissolution of the marriage as the man and woman had not been living together for long.

The bench heard an appeal filed by the husband against the dismissal by the family court of his petition seeking divorce on grounds of mental cruelty and desertion, IANS reported.

Judges rule out cruelty

The judges said the man’s contention that his wife was a “free-willed person” who would go out on her own to the market and elsewhere and did not observe pardah did not amount to an act of cruelty.

Also read: Allahabad HC stays arrest of fact checker Mohammad Zubair

"The act of the wife being free-willed or a person who would travel on her own or meet up with other members of the civil society without forming any illegal or immoral relationship, may not be described as an act of cruelty," the agency quoted the court as saying.

The judges noted that differences of perception towards life may give rise to different behaviour by individuals, and these may be described as cruel by others.

Family court ruling upheld

“At the same time, such perceptions are neither absolute nor such as may themselves give rise to allegations of cruelty unless observed and proven facts are such as may be recognised in law to be acts of cruelty."

The court upheld the family court decision in not acting on the plea of insults caused by the wife, saying the husband has not described such acts with details of time or place of occurrence.

"As to the act of immoral relations alleged by the (wife), no conclusive evidence could be led by the (husband),” the judges said.

Also read: 'Constitutional necessity' | Allahabad HC judge praises UCC at VHP event

Desertion is cruelty

“Besides the allegation of the (wife) having formed an immoral relationship with a person described as 'Punjabi Baba', no other fact was attempted to be proved and no direct or credible evidence could be led."

However, the judges said the husband may claim mental cruelty by the wife to the extent that she had deserted him for very long.

They added that this and her refusal to cohabit with the husband to revive her matrimonial relationship appeared to be an act of desertion and may itself lead to dissolution of the marriage.

Marriage may be dissolved

The wife had also never made any effort to seek restitution of her conjugal rights, the court observed.

Also read: ‘Abuse of authority’: HC slams UP cops for detaining pregnant woman, child

Allowing the plea for dissolution of marriage, the court noted that the man a0nd woman were gainfully employed, and their only child, now 29 years old, was in the custody of his wife.