Purposive Interpretation Necessary: High Court at Calcutta Clarifies Arbitration Scope “If the Testimony is True, We Act on It”: Kerala High Court Upholds Convictions in Divakaran Murder Case State Cannot Utilize Private Land Without Legal Acquisition and Compensation: High Court Upholds Lower Courts’ Rulings Delhi High Court Stresses ‘Procedure is the Handmaid of Justice’ in Allowing New Evidence in IFFCO TOKIO Case Mere Suspicion Cannot Substitute Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt – Allahabad High Court Acquits Rajveer Singh in Murder Case Non-Compliance with Labor Laws Cannot Deny Compensation for Informal Workers: Bombay High Court in Motor Accident Case Limitation Period Starts from Fraud Discovery, Not Sale Execution,” Rules Andhra Pradesh High Court Testamentary Court’s Role is Limited to Verifying Testamentary Disposition: Calcutta High Court Declares Appellant Cannot Say at One Time That a Process Is Valid to Gain an Advantage and Then Turn Around and Say It Is Invalid When the Result Is Unfavorable,” Rules High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh A humane approach is warranted in cases involving senior citizens: High Court Grants Relief in Bank Loan Recovery Case, Allows Installment Repayments Compliance with Section 52A of NDPS Act is Mandatory”: High Court Acquits Accused in Ganja Case Unregistered Lease Deed Admissible Under Section 90 Evidence Act: Orissa High Court Restores Permanent Injunction Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Used as "Backdoor Appeal" to Introduce New Evidence in Land Acquisition Cases: Supreme Court Payment Under Minimum Wages Act Does Not Establish Employment Relationship: High Court on Res Judicata in Labour Court Proceedings Taxation Law | Reopening Assessment Beyond Four Years Requires Proof of Failure to Disclose: Delhi High Court Rigors of Section 37 Cannot Override Medical Priority: Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Bail on Medical Grounds in NDPS Case Consumer Law | Mere Deterioration of Condition Post-Surgery Does Not Imply Medical Negligence Without Proof of Lack of Skill or Care: Supreme Court Supreme Court Declares Accessibility Rules for Disabled Must Be Mandatory, Strikes Down Voluntary Standards as "Ultra Vires" Court's Role Under Section 11(6A) is Limited to Verifying Existence of Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court Refers Dispute to Arbitration Section 37 of the Partnership Act Entitles Outgoing Partner to Profits Derived from Firm Assets Post-Dissolution Until Final Settlement: Supreme Court Media Cannot Act as a Parallel Court: Kerala High Court Examines Media’s Right to Report Pending Criminal Cases and Court Proceedings

Bullets of Unjustified Accusations Lead to Fatal Wounds in Matrimony: Delhi High Court Grants Divorce on Grounds of Cruelty

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court, led by Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna, has granted divorce to Major Shashi Chauhan on the grounds of cruelty, under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. This decision, pronounced on March 6, 2024, sets aside the previous judgment of the Family Court, which had dismissed Major Chauhan's divorce petition.

The Court assessed the case under the purview of mental cruelty as a valid ground for divorce. The bench emphasized, "Vindictiveness, vexation, and intolerance are the foes of coherent comprehension," underscoring the role of unjustified accusations in inflicting mental cruelty.

Major Shashi Chauhan and Major Ritu Bhasin, both serving in the Indian Army, had a prolonged courtship before marrying in February 2010. Soon, differences surfaced, primarily concerning dowry expectations and behavioral issues. The marriage saw a brief period of cohabitation, followed by prolonged separation and a slew of legal battles. Major Chauhan filed for divorce on grounds of cruelty, which was initially dismissed by the Family Court.

The High Court meticulously analyzed the couple's matrimonial life, allegations of cruelty, and subsequent legal proceedings. It noted that Major Bhasin failed to substantiate her allegations of cruelty and dowry harassment, instead resorting to filing multiple complaints against Major Chauhan, which either got dismissed or led to acquittal. These actions were seen as indicative of vindictiveness and mental cruelty. The Court also highlighted the long separation and lack of efforts for reconciliation, exacerbating the matrimonial discord.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed, “The aggrieved person is entitled to avail the remedy under laws, but crossing the point of ‘no return’ becomes inevitable once engulfed in the rabbit hole of criminal litigations.”

Decision: Concluding that the marriage was beyond salvage, marred by irreconcilable differences, and continued legal disputes, the Court granted a decree of divorce to Major Chauhan, thereby dissolving the marriage.

Date of Decision: 06th March, 2024

Xxx vs xxx

Similar News