The Himachal Pradesh High Court ruled that a wife cannot be blamed for desertion if her husband fathered a child with another woman during their marriage. The Court said this act clearly shows an ongoing relationship that forced the wife to live apart.
SHIMLA: The Himachal Pradesh High Court has made a strong observation in a marital dispute, stating that when a husband affair and has a child with another woman while his marriage with his first wife is still valid, it clearly shows that he maintained an extra-marital relationship.
Such conduct, the Court said, naturally compels the wife to live separately and she cannot be accused of desertion in such a situation.
Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, while deciding the appeal, remarked:
“Birth of a daughter… clearly depicts that either appellant was already in a relationship with someone or developed relations thereafter… respondent has been compelled to live separately.”
This significant observation came in a case filed by Desh Raj Gupta, who had approached the High Court under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, challenging the decision of the District Judge, Shimla. His earlier petition under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Act — which deal with cruelty and desertion — had been dismissed.
The husband had married the respondent in 1993 at Shimla. In his appeal, he alleged that his wife had left him “without any valid reason” and claimed that she was unable to adjust to life in a small town. On these grounds, he sought a decree of divorce, arguing that his wife had deserted him without cause.
However, the wife firmly denied these allegations. She stated that it was her husband who had abandoned her, left her at her parental home in Shimla, and never returned. Moreover, she alleged that he had subsequently married another woman and started a separate family.
While examining the evidence, the High Court referred to the “parivar register” (family register), which contained the name of a girl child born in 1996, listed as the daughter of Desh Raj. This, the Court said, clearly established that the petitioner had a relationship with another woman while still legally married to his first wife.
The Court noted that such behavior directly contradicted the husband’s claims of being deserted. It showed that the wife was compelled to live apart because of the husband’s actions. Hence, she could not be held guilty of desertion.
Justice Thakur observed:
“The birth of the child was undeniable proof that the husband either already had or later developed an illicit relationship, making it impossible for the wife to continue cohabitation under such circumstances.”
The judge’s words made it clear that the wife’s separation was not voluntary, but a forced consequence of the husband’s misconduct.
In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the District Court’s earlier finding and refused to grant divorce to the husband. The ruling once again reinforced that a spouse cannot be blamed for desertion when the other’s wrongful conduct makes marital life intolerable.
Explanatory Table of Laws & Sections Mentioned
| Law / Act | Section | Provision Title | Explanation (Simple Indian English) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 | Section 13(1)(ia) | Divorce on the ground of cruelty | Either husband or wife can seek divorce if the other has treated them with physical or mental cruelty. |
| Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 | Section 13(1)(ib) | Divorce on the ground of desertion | Divorce can be granted if one spouse has deserted the other for a continuous period of at least two years before filing the petition. |
| Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 | Section 28 | Appeals from decrees and orders | Allows a person to file an appeal against a decree or order passed by a family or district court in matrimonial matters. |
| Evidence (Parivar Register) | Family record maintained by Panchayat / Local body | Used as official proof of family members, births, and relations. In this case, it showed the birth of a daughter in 1996 as the child of Desh Raj Gupta, proving relationship with another woman. |
Case Summary
- Case Title: Desh Raj Gupta v. Urmila Gupta
- Court: High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla
- Bench / Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur
- Date of Judgment: 2024 (as per case record in uploaded PDF)
- Case Type: First Appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
- Appeal Against: Judgment of District Judge, Shimla (divorce petition dismissed)
- Citation: Desh Raj Gupta v. Urmila Gupta, FAO (HMA) No. ___ of 2024 (HP HC)
- Appellant (Petitioner before Trial Court): Desh Raj Gupta (Husband)
- Respondent: Urmila Gupta (Wife)
- Counsel for Appellant: Shri Ajay Sharma, Advocate (as recorded)
- Counsel for Respondent: Shri R. L. Chaudhary, Advocate
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the Indian courts and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of “ShoneeKapoor.com” or its affiliates. This article is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content provided is not legal advice, and viewers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Viewer discretion is advised