Registration Of FIR Is Mandatory If Information Ex Facie Discloses Commission Of  Cognizable Offence: Supreme Court 'No Res Judicata': Supreme Court Holds Rejection Of Section 156(3) CrPC Plea Is No Bar To Subsequent Registration Of FIR Auto Dealers' Referral Charges From Banks & Insurers Constitute 'Business Auxiliary Service', But No Penalty If Tax Paid Before Show Cause Notice: Supreme Court MACT | Appellate Courts Must Liberally Admit Additional Evidence Under Order XLI Rule 27 CPC To Compute 'Just Compensation': Supreme Court MACT | Post-Accident Vehicle Position On Sketch Cannot Be Sole Basis To Infer Contributory Negligence: Supreme Court Enhances Compensation To ₹50.8 Lakhs 'Sanction Under Section 19(1)(c) PC Act Must Be Granted By Removing Authority': Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction Mere Recovery Of Money Cannot Resurrect Prosecution Proof Of Demand Is Sine Qua: Supreme Court Lok Adalat Awards Without Signatures Of All Rival Claimants Are Invalid, Order I Rule 8 CPC Inapplicable: Supreme Court Lok Adalat Cannot Decide Title Disputes, Mere Physical Possession Doesn't Prove Ownership": Supreme Court Quashes Land Acquisition Awards Power Discoms Can't Escape Liability: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Damages For Death Caused By Snapped Live Wires Lying On Ground Extra-Judicial Confessions To Village Administrative Officers Cannot Be Accepted As Gospel Truth Without Signatures And Corroboration: Madras High Court Acquits Murder Accused 'Article 21 Trumps UAPA Rigors': Allahabad High Court Grants Bail To PFI Members After 5 Years In Jail Due To 'Sluggish' Trial" Daughters Cannot Be Denied Equal Share: Orissa High Court Upholds Compensation Apportionment In Favor Of Daughters Under Hindu Succession Act Cannot Reopen Closed Chapter Years Later: Calcutta High Court Dismisses BSF Ex-Head Constable's Plea Claiming Voluntary Retirement Was Extracted Under Coercion Long-Standing Relationship And Public Recognition Prove Valid Marriage: Karnataka High Court Upholds Second Wife's Right To 1/3rd Share In Property Collector Becomes Functus Officio Once Duty Is Determined: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Penalty On Stamp Duty Deficiency Eyewitness Testimony Contradicted By Medical Evidence Cannot Sustain Murder Conviction: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Woman In IPC 302 Case

Allegations of Illicit Relationship in Divorce Petition Not Sufficient for Mental Cruelty: Delhi High Court

04 September 2024 11:00 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal decision, the High Court has ruled that mere allegations of an illicit relationship made in a divorce petition are not automatically indicative of mental cruelty. The ruling came in response to a divorce appeal filed by a husband seeking dissolution of his marriage on grounds of mental cruelty due to allegations of an illicit relationship made by his wife. The court emphasized that such allegations need to be proven false or motivated to qualify as cruelty.

Quoting from the judgment, the court noted, “Mere fact that she is not able to prove the same would not necessarily mean that the allegation was per se false or actuated by any malice or ill-will, unless held so by the Court.” The court reiterated that unproven charges in a written statement do not necessarily constitute cruelty. “A fact which was not proved does not necessarily mean that it was false one,” the judgment stated.

The ruling further emphasized that the burden of proof rests with the petitioner seeking divorce on grounds of mental cruelty. The court highlighted that the petitioner should have shown that the allegations were false, rather than shifting the burden to the respondent.

The court’s decision also pointed out that the husband had failed to mention in his affidavit any mental trauma caused by the allegations made in the written statement. “His affidavit (Ex. PW1/A) is conspicuously silent on the said crucial score,” the judgment noted. The court highlighted that the husband’s failure to include such claims in his affidavit undermined his plea for mental cruelty.

The judgment referred to various precedents that underlined the need to differentiate between unproved allegations and cruelty. The court remarked, “A decree of divorce cannot follow merely on the ground of delay in disposal of divorce proceedings.” It emphasized that the court should assess each case individually and consider the evidence presented before making a determination of mental cruelty.

High Court set aside the Family Court’s judgment and dismissed the husband’s petition seeking divorce on grounds of mental cruelty. This ruling sheds light on the need for well-substantiated evidence of mental cruelty in divorce cases, rather than relying solely on allegations made in the written statements.

D.D- 8.08.2023

KAMLESH SHARMA vs  YOGENDER KUMAR SHARMA

Latest Legal News