(Where the wife leveled false allegations
of illicit relationship with another Lady.)
In Hemwanti Tripathi vs. Harish
Narain Tripathi, 181 (2011) DLT 237, it is also
held that :
"14........That the ratio
of Ashok
Kumar v. Santosh Sharma (supra) and Savitri Bachman
(supra)
wherein it was held that a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty
can be passed on the strength of false, baseless, scandalous and malicious
allegations in the written statement by one party on the other is thus found applicable
to the facts of the present case because in the case at hand the husband has
not led any evidence in support of his allegations. What surprises this Court
the most is that despite the fact that the Trial Court gave the entire findings
in favour of the Appellant but still passed the judgment against the Appellant
merely on the ground that the acts alleged by the Petitioner against the
Respondent at best can be termed as wear and tear of daily life and does not
amount to cruelty. The learned Trial Court further held against the Appellant
because she failed to produce any close relative including her uncle who was
living in neighborhood to prove the instance of beatings given by the
Respondent on various dates. This Court fails to comprehend as to how such a
view could be taken by the learned Trial Court as clearly serious and malicious
allegations of the Appellant having relationship with one Sadhu and her staying
out of the house during nights also levelled by the Respondent and as per the
settled legal position, casting such aspersions on the character of the other
spouse has the affect of causing deleterious affect on the mind of such spouse
and the same is a worse form of cruelty. It has not been denied by the
Respondent that no evidence was led by him to prove that the Appellant used to
go out during night to stay with that Sadhu. The Respondent has also not given
any reasons in the Ex. PW 1/1 to severe his relationship with the Appellant.
In the matter of : AJEET PANWAR Vs BABITA ( Delhi High Court).
29. It
is a case where not only false allegations were made against the
appellant/husband and in-laws but they were also got arrested and later on
acquitted on charges being found to be false. This in itself amounts to
cruelty. Even the attempt by the respondent/wife to commit suicide so as to get
his in-laws including unmarried Nanad and married Nanad implicated in itself is
an act of cruelty on her part upon her husband and in-laws.
30. Learned Judge Family Court failed to
consider all these aspects while dismissing the petition seeking divorce on
account of cruelty. Learned Judge Family Court failed to note that in
matrimonial pleadings appellant was not required to establish the case beyond
reasonable doubt like any criminal trials but on preponderance of
probabilities. Both the acts independently were sufficient to prove cruelty and
grant of a decree of divorce to the appellant/husband.
31. The learned Judge Family Court in our
estimate failed to approve and appreciate the pleadings of the parties and
their evidence under correct legal perspective.
32. The impugned judgment is not
sustainable and is set aside.
