Wife Talking To Another Man Is Not Extramarital Affair Or Adultery? Jharkhand High Court Answers

RANCHI: The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that accusing a wife of having an extramarital affair merely because she talks to another man reflects gender-based stereotypes and can amount to mental cruelty towards her. The Court also clarified that similar allegations made by a wife against her husband, without proper evidence, may amount to cruelty.

Read Also:- Wife Asking For A Separate House Amounts To Cruelty: Kerala High Court Grants Husband Divorce After 9-Year Separation

A Division Bench of Chief Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Manoj Prasad, in its judgment dated 3 November 2026, dismissed a husband's appeal against the Family Court's refusal to grant him divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion.

The couple married on 30 April 2005 and had two children. The husband alleged that his wife avoided maintaining a proper marital relationship, frequently quarrelled with him and his family members, and regularly spoke to another man using his mobile phone.

He also accused her of having an extramarital relationship and claimed that she left the matrimonial home on 15 April 2015. According to him, his attempts to bring her back and restore their marriage were unsuccessful.

The wife denied these allegations. She claimed that her husband and in-laws had subjected her to physical and mental cruelty over dowry demands. She also alleged that her husband was involved in an extramarital relationship with a female colleague.

The husband approached the Family Court seeking divorce under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. However, the Family Court found insufficient evidence to establish cruelty or desertion and dismissed his petition.

Challenging the decision, the husband argued before the High Court that the couple had been living separately since 2015 and that both children were residing with him. He submitted that their marriage had effectively ended and that repeated efforts at reconciliation had failed.

Read Also;- Tamil Nadu CM Vijay’s Wife Sangeetha Withdraws Divorce Plea After Alleging ‘Extramarital Affair’ — Major Twist In High-Profile Case

He further argued that criminal proceedings initiated against him, in which he claimed no guilt had been established, should also have been considered while deciding his allegations of cruelty.

The High Court examined the evidence and observed that cruelty under matrimonial law may be physical or mental. However, the conduct must be serious enough to make continued matrimonial life incompatible.

The Court found that the husband's allegations of physical cruelty were not supported by sufficient reliable evidence. Two witnesses were his colleagues and friends, while his mother, who was allegedly involved in the quarrels, had not been examined.

The Bench also refused to rely on the testimony of the couple's 11-year-old daughter because she admitted during cross-examination that her evidence had been prepared under her father's dictation.

While examining mental cruelty, the Court considered the husband's allegation that his wife was having an extramarital affair because she spoke to another man.

The Bench observed:

“Coming to the second dimension of cruelty, i.e. mental cruelty, which centres on an allegation that the wife is alleged to have had an extramarital relationship. Such allegations, if proved, may amount to mental cruelty in appropriate cases, but in the present case there are allegations and counter-allegations. The husband's allegations begin with an assertion that his wife had an extramarital relationship, including statements that she used to talk to an unknown male over the husband's own mobile phone. To our considered view, such allegations are typical gender-based stereotypes, where, if a woman talks to a man, even if he is a friend, charges of adultery or of an extramarital relationship are levelled. We are, therefore, of the considered view that such allegations amount to cruelty towards the wife. Counter-allegations by the wife of an extramarital relationship against her husband, without appropriate proof, may also amount to cruelty...”

The Court made it clear that unproved allegations of an extramarital affair can amount to mental cruelty, irrespective of whether they are made by the husband or the wife. Simply talking to a person of the opposite sex cannot, by itself, establish an extramarital relationship.

On the issue of desertion, the Court noted that the husband's divorce petition had specifically referred to cruelty, but his pleadings also contained allegations of desertion.

The Bench clarified that failure to mention a particular legal provision does not automatically defeat a claim when the necessary facts have been pleaded and the issue has been considered.

However, the Court found that the wife had expressed her willingness to resume married life, including during the proceedings before the High Court, while the husband had refused to live with her.

The Court also considered the earlier compromise between the parties in 2015 and the unsuccessful attempts to restore their relationship.

Despite the couple living separately for several years and the two children residing with the husband, the High Court held that the legal requirements for proving cruelty or desertion had not been satisfied.

Regarding maintenance, the Court noted that the husband had earlier challenged an interim maintenance order of ₹3,000 under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, but his challenge had been dismissed.

The Bench declined to pass any fresh maintenance order. However, it allowed the wife to approach the competent court for modification if there was a change in circumstances, subject to hearing both parties.

Accordingly, the Jharkhand High Court dismissed the husband's appeal and upheld the Family Court's decision refusing divorce under Sections 13(1)(i-a) and 13(1)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

EXPLANATORY TABLE: LAWS AND SECTIONS MENTIONED

CASE DETAILS

BENCH

• Hon'ble Chief Justice M.S. Sonak
• Hon'ble Justice Manoj Prasad (Judgment authored)

COUNSELS

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• 10 Years Apart, Still No Divorce: Husband's divorce appeal failed despite prolonged separation since 2015.
• Children With Father: Both children lived with the husband, but this did not establish cruelty or desertion.
• Affair Allegations Can Backfire: Accusing a wife of infidelity without proof can itself amount to mental cruelty.
• Same Rule Applies To Wives: The Court acknowledged that unproved allegations of a husband's extramarital affair may also constitute cruelty.
• Evidence Matters More Than Allegations: The husband's witnesses and daughter's testimony failed to establish cruelty. Long separation alone was insufficient to prove desertion.