High Court Denies Divorce Despite Clear Grounds of Cruelty

Summary:

In yet another shocking setback for men seeking justice in marriage, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court refused to grant a husband divorce, despite his serious and well-founded allegations of cruelty and illness. The court set an unreasonably high burden of proof on the husband while accepting the wife’s denials without requiring any evidence. This ruling once again highlights the blatant bias in family courts, where men’s suffering is ignored, and they are forced to remain trapped in broken marriages.

Facts of the Case

• L. Santhanakrishnan (Husband) and T. Nirmala (Wife) were married on 01.07.2018.
• Both had failed previous marriages and entered this union hoping for a fresh start.
• However, they separated on 09.12.2020 due to the wife’s behavior.
• The husband filed for divorce (H.M.O.P No.443 of 2023) citing cruelty and communicable venereal disease, while the wife sought restitution of conjugal rights (H.M.O.P No.445 of 2023) to trap him further.
• The Family Court, Karur, sided with the wife, rejecting the husband’s plea and forcing him to remain in a dead marriage. The husband appealed to the Madras High Court, seeking justice.

Legal Provisions Involved

• Section 13(1)(v) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Divorce can be granted if one spouse suffers from a venereal disease in a communicable form.
• Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Divorce can be granted if one spouse treats the other with cruelty.

Arguments

Husband’s Arguments

1. His wife was suffering from a sexually transmitted disease and did not disclose it before marriage.
2. Her cruel behavior made marital life unbearable:
   • Addicted to pornography and masturbation instead of fulfilling marital obligations.
   • Refused to do household chores, treating the husband as a slave.
   • Was a spendthrift, financially burdening him.
   • Neglected her in-laws and treated them with disrespect.
   • Spent hours on the phone instead of focusing on their marriage.
3. Their marriage was beyond repair, and forcing him to stay married was a violation of his rights.

Wife’s Arguments

1. Simply denied all allegations without producing any counter-evidence.
2. Claimed she had only a minor gynecological issue (leukorrhea) and not an STD.
3. Argued that watching porn and masturbation are not illegal.

Court’s Observations – A Clear Bias Against Men

• Unrealistic burden of proof on the husband: The court demanded medical proof that the wife had an STD but did not order a medical examination, essentially making it impossible for him to prove his case.
• Wife’s privacy upheld, husband’s suffering ignored: The court defended the wife’s ‘right’ to watch pornography and masturbate but failed to consider how this negatively impacted the husband and their marriage.
• No consideration for emotional cruelty: The court did not consider how the wife’s actions humiliated, neglected, and mentally tortured the husband.
• Ignored the wife’s financial irresponsibility and household neglect: The court completely dismissed the husband’s valid complaints about her not contributing to the marriage or taking care of her marital duties.
• Allowed a dead marriage to continue: Despite clear evidence that the marriage was irretrievably broken, the court forced the husband to stay trapped.

Conclusion – Another Miscarriage of Justice Against Men

• The husband’s appeal was unfairly dismissed, and he was denied a basic right – freedom from a failed marriage.
• The court prioritized the wife’s rights while completely ignoring the husband’s suffering.
• The ruling shows how men are treated unfairly in family courts, where their pain is downplayed, their evidence is scrutinized excessively, and they are expected to endure abuse in silence.

Comments from the author of this website

• Husband’s burden of proof was unrealistically high – He had to provide medical reports that were never ordered by the court, making it impossible for him to prove his case.
• Wife’s mere denial was accepted without evidence – While the husband was asked for medical proof, the wife’s simple “no” was taken as the truth without her undergoing any examination.
• Pornography and masturbation addiction were excused – The court ignored how these habits ruined the marital relationship, essentially telling men they have no right to expect a normal marital life.
• Financial and household neglect was ignored – The court refused to acknowledge that a wife who refuses to contribute financially, do household chores, or respect in-laws is being cruel.
• Men are forced to stay in failed marriages – Even when a marriage is clearly over, courts force men to stay, ensuring they suffer emotionally, financially, and mentally.

Final Thoughts:

This judgment proves once again that Indian family courts are deeply biased against men. If a man files for divorce citing serious issues like disease and cruelty, he is doubted, disbelieved, and denied justice. However, if a woman makes even the weakest allegations, courts immediately side with her.

It is time to reform the biased family court system and recognize that men deserve justice too. No man should be forced to stay in a marriage where his rights, dignity, and emotional well-being are destroyed.

Read Complete Judgement Here