Wife Calling Husband 'Black-Complexioned' And 'Fat' Not Enough To Prove Cruelty? Chhattisgarh HC Denies Divorce

CHATTISGARH: The Chhattisgarh High Court has dismissed a husband's appeal seeking divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion, holding that his allegations against his wife were not proved through cogent evidence. The Court also held that the wife's alleged act of calling him “black complexioned” or “fatty shaped” was not sufficient in the facts of this case to grant divorce.

A Division Bench of Justice Parth Prateem Sahu and Justice Sachin Singh Rajput was hearing an appeal filed by the husband under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984. He had challenged the Family Court's order rejecting his divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

The couple married on 7 March 2019 according to Hindu rites. According to the husband, the wife treated him with hostility, threatened to implicate him in false cases and frequently went to her parental home. He claimed that despite his efforts to bring her back, she refused to return. The wife later initiated proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act against the husband and his family members.

Read Also:- Personal Law Is No Shield And Can’t Override the Special Marriage Act: Jharkhand High Court Slams Muslim Man For Hiding First Marriage

The wife denied his allegations. She instead alleged that the husband had an illicit relationship with another woman, consumed alcohol, abused her and failed to properly care for her during pregnancy. She claimed that the husband himself was unwilling to continue the marriage.

The husband argued before the High Court that his wife had been living separately since December 2019 without sufficient justification and had failed to resume cohabitation despite his willingness to continue the marriage. He also challenged the Family Court's direction requiring him to return her stridhan.

After examining the evidence, the High Court found that the husband had failed to establish the necessary ingredients of cruelty and desertion. The Court noted that several allegations had been made against the wife, but they were not supported by cogent evidence.

The Court specifically observed:

“Though the appellant/husband has made several allegations against the respondent/wife, yet none of them has been substantiated by leading any cogent evidence of the witnesses.”

On the husband's allegation about comments concerning his physical appearance, the Court said:

“Of course, he has alleged that the respondent/wife used to brand him as being a black complexioned or a fatty shaped but they cannot be taken to be sufficient ground for granting a decree of divorce to him.”

On desertion, the Court found that the husband could not prove that his wife was staying with her parents without reasonable excuse. The wife maintained that no effort had been made by him to take her back, while her mother stated that the husband's family had sent her away after her miscarriage.

The High Court also relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh, (2007) 4 SCC 511, which explains the principles governing mental cruelty in matrimonial cases. The Court noted that there is no uniform standard for mental cruelty and that the examples identified by the Supreme Court are illustrative rather than exhaustive.

Applying those principles, the High Court observed:

“If the facts and circumstances of the case in hand are analysed, there is nothing on record on the basis of which the act of the respondent/wife can be dragged within the sweep of cruelty as has been categorised in the case referred to above.”

The Court further found that merely making several allegations could not substitute for proof. It held that the husband had also failed to establish the necessary animus deserendi, or intention to permanently desert the matrimonial relationship, on the wife's part.

Read Also:- Divorce Petitions Cannot Be Treated Like Routine Civil Cases; Reconciliation Must Come Before Filing of Replies: J&K And Ladakh High Court

The High Court therefore found no reason to interfere with the Family Court's decision. The High Court dismissed the husband's appeal without costs, leaving the refusal of divorce intact.

EXPLANATORY TABLE OF LAWS AND SECTIONS

CASE DETAILS

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• A husband alleged his wife repeatedly mocked his dark complexion and body shape, but the Court held these allegations were not enough to end the marriage.
• He also alleged hostility, threats of false cases and prolonged separation, yet the Court found that these claims lacked cogent evidence.
• For a husband, alleging mental cruelty is not enough. Even repeated matrimonial misconduct must be backed by specific and convincing proof.
• Even years of living separately do not automatically prove desertion. The husband must also establish that the wife intended to desert the marriage without reasonable cause.
• Despite the husband's allegations of insults, threats and separation, the Chhattisgarh High Court refused him divorce because the legal requirements of cruelty and desertion were not proved.

Read Also:- Domestic Violence Act Cannot Be Misused By Woman To Re-Enter Abandoned Matrimonial Home: Delhi High Court Rejects Wife’s Plea