Mere Reproduction Of Evidence Can Never Be Equated With Appreciation: Karnataka High Court Quashes Penalty Against Govt Employee Accused Cannot Repeatedly Send Cheque To FSL Till Favourable Report Is Obtained: Kerala High Court In NI Act Case Succession Certificate Cannot Be Issued For Gold Jewels Pledged With Bank, Applies Only To Debts And Securities: Madras High Court Order 11 Rule 14 CPC | Court Cannot Direct Production Of Documents Without Ascertaining They Are In Party's Possession: Calcutta High Court Undertrial Prisoners Don't Suffer 'Civil Death', Retain Fundamental Right To Alienate Property From Jail: Rajasthan High Court Direction For Reasonable Annual Enhancement Of Maintenance Under Section 125 CrPC Merely Preserves Its Real Value Against Inflation: Delhi High Court Testimony Of Sole Interested Witness Must Be Of 'Sterling Quality' To Base Conviction: Patna High Court Acquits Murder Convict Failure To Communicate Written Grounds Of Arrest Renders Arrest Constitutionally Infirm, Accused Entitled To Bail: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 482 CrPC Petition Not Maintainable Against Order Framing Charge Under SC/ST Act, Appeal Lies Under Section 14A: Tripura High Court Disputed Questions Of Fact Regarding Title And Forged Documents Cannot Be Decided Under Article 226: Telangana High Court Matter To Be Enquired By Bar Council: Madhya Pradesh High Court Dismisses Lawyer's PILs With Costs For Suppressing Attorney-Client Relationship BDA Cannot Arbitrarily Reverse Resolutions Passed To Comply With Judicial Directives: Karnataka High Court Section 52A NDPS Act: Mere Non-Compliance Does Not Automatically Vitiate Trial Unless Evidence Is Doubtful: Punjab & Haryana High Court Seniority Must Be Determined From Date Of Substantive Appointment, Not Ad-Hoc Service: Allahabad High Court Uncorroborated Testimony Of Drug Inspector Cannot Form Sole Basis For Conviction Under Drugs Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court Suppression Of Adverse Facts Strikes At Root Of Equitable Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court Denies Injunction In HUF Property Dispute

Allahabad High Court Grants Divorce on Grounds of Mental Cruelty and Breakdown of Marriage

06 September 2024 5:15 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Allahabad High Court has granted a divorce decree to the appellant, Ravindra Pratap Yadav, on the grounds of mental cruelty and a complete breakdown of the marriage. The judgment was delivered by Justice Suneet Kumar and Justice Rajendra Kumar-IV.

The case pertained to a divorce petition filed by Ravindra Pratap Yadav under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, challenging the dismissal order passed by the Principal Judge of the Family Court, Varanasi. The appellant alleged mental cruelty, long desertion, and a divorce agreement reached in a community Panchayat.

According to the appellant's case, serious problems arose in the marriage shortly after the "Gauna" ceremony. The respondent, Smt. Asha Devi, refused to live with him as his wife and displayed apathy and inhuman conduct. The appellant made several attempts to reconcile, but the respondent's behavior remained unchanged. The appellant further claimed that the respondent had entered into a second marriage with another person. Based on these allegations, the appellant sought a divorce decree.

The court below dismissed the case, citing the lack of admissible evidence and the absence of proof regarding the respondent's second marriage. However, the High Court, after examining the uncontroverted evidence presented by the appellant, criticized the lower court's hyper-technical approach and held that the conduct of the respondent amounted to mental cruelty.

The High Court referred to previous judgments and observed that denying a spouse sexual intercourse without sufficient reason itself amounts to mental cruelty. It further enumerated illustrations of mental cruelty, emphasizing that a sustained course of abusive and humiliating treatment, indifference, neglect, and refusal to have intercourse without valid reason can lead to mental cruelty.

The High Court concluded that the appellant had established a case of mental cruelty and a complete breakdown of marriage. Accordingly, it set aside the impugned order of the Family Court and granted the divorce decree to the appellant.

The judgment highlights the importance of considering the overall conduct and effects on mental health in cases of alleged mental cruelty. It emphasizes that a spouse cannot be compelled to continue a marital relationship if it has ceased to exist in reality.

D.D.:- 16.05.2023

Ravindra Pratap Yadav vs Smt. Asha Devi And Others

Latest Legal News