Nagpur: Coming to a woman’s rescue, the Nagpur bench of Bombay high court ruled that her habit of chewing tobacco or kharra, though bad, isn’t sufficient to grant divorce to her husband.
Upholding the Nagpur family court’s judgment of January 21, 2015, a division bench comprising justices Atul Chandurkar and Pushpa Ganediwala pointed out that husband’s allegations are general and omnibus in nature. “It’s the specific allegation that since wife was having a habit of chewing tobacco, he was required to spend a lot of money for her medical treatment. However, he failed to bring on record the medical papers and bills in support of this pleading.”
Quoting the family court, the bench held that husband’s pleadings aren’t so grave and weighty to dissolve the marriage. “If the marriage is dissolved, their son and daughter would suffer a big loss and their welfare will be affected. In the best interest of both children, the marital tie shall remain intact. No case is made out by the husband to disturb the trial court’s well-reasoned findings.”
After their marriage on June 15, 2003, the differences between the couple had grown, and the husband filed a divorce case in family court on the grounds of cruelty. He majorly pleaded that the wife’s habit of chewing tobacco or kharra was grounds for divorce.
According to him, she was addicted to chewing tobacco and therefore developed a cyst in her stomach. He had to incur huge medical expenses for her treatment. He also claimed that she wasn’t doing any household work, used to frequently quarrel with him and in-laws, and visit her parental home for days without informing him.
The judges, however, made it clear that these allegations aren’t sufficient to form an opinion that he is undergoing acute mental pain, agony, suffering, disappointment and frustration and hence, it’s not possible for him to live in wife’s company.
“These charges are nothing but normal wear and tear in married life. The couple lived together for around nine years and the husband couldn’t produce specific instances of mental harassment to enable this court to adjudicate the case of mental cruelty in his favour. On the contrary, he admitted that in 2008 he was detected HIV positive and wife stayed with him till 2010. The instances of physical and mental harassment, as proved by her, are on better footing than him.”
Quoting HC’s old judgments, the judges said married life should be assessed as a whole and a few isolated instances over certain periods will not amount to cruelty.
“The ill-conduct must be preceded for a fairly lengthy period where the relationship has deteriorated to an extent that because of the acts and behaviour of a spouse, one party finds it extremely difficult to live with another. Mere trivial irritations, quarrels, normal wear and tear of married life, which happens in day to day life in all families, wouldn’t be adequate for divorce,” the judges added, before dismissing the man’s plea.
WHAT HC SAID
* Married life should be assessed as whole
* Few isolated instances will not amount to cruelty
* Hubby’s allegations are general & omnibus in nature
* He failed to produce medical bills to support his pleadings
* Wife’s harassment allegations are on better footing than him
* Mere trivial irritations & quarrels inadequate to grant divorce
Source link
English
हिन्दी