Calls for Pragmatic Approach to Desertion and Cruelty in Divorce Cases: Calcutta High Court Orders Fresh Trial

Calcutta High Court set aside the dismissal of a husband’s divorce suit by the Additional District Judge at Asansol. The High Court remanded the matter for retrial, observing procedural lapses in the trial court and emphasizing the evolving jurisprudence on desertion and cruelty in marital disputes.

The Division Bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Justice Uday Kumar found that the trial court failed to grant the husband a fair opportunity to present his case. It also criticized the trial court’s rigid interpretation of cruelty and desertion, calling for a broader, pragmatic understanding of irretrievable marital breakdown in modern society.

The case revolved around allegations of cruelty and desertion by the wife, Namita Paul Talukder. The trial court dismissed the suit on March 28, 2022, deeming the husband’s evidence insufficient to establish cruelty or desertion. The High Court, however, found that the trial court violated the principles of natural justice by reserving judgment on the very day the plaintiff's witnesses were examined, leaving no room for substantive argument or additional evidence. Justice Bhattacharyya noted, “Substantial opportunity was not afforded to the plaintiff to place his case before the court.”

Moreover, the court highlighted the wife’s persistent absence throughout the trial and appeal proceedings, despite proper service of summons and notices. This absence, the High Court observed, suggested “utter absence of animus revertendi” (intent to return) on her part, a factor relevant to the ground of desertion.

While the High Court upheld the trial court's rejection of cruelty claims due to insufficient evidence, it criticized the limited scope of Indian divorce laws in addressing irretrievable marital breakdowns. Justice Bhattacharyya remarked, “Keeping in view the evolving needs of society, it is probably high time that components of irretrievable breakdown of marriage be read into the grounds of desertion and cruelty, to ensure that parties are not forcibly kept bound to dead marriages.”

The Court observed that the wife’s consistent absence from her husband’s company without explanation could itself furnish a case of desertion, irrespective of the non-recognition of irretrievable breakdown under Indian law.

Recognizing the absence of any scope for reconciliation, the High Court remanded the matter to the trial court. It directed the trial court to permit the husband to amend his plaint to include new facts about the wife’s continued absence and to allow him to produce further evidence substantiating desertion and cruelty. The Court also called for a more holistic evaluation of marital disputes, emphasizing a pragmatic approach that reflects the realities of modern relationships.

The Calcutta High Court’s ruling highlights the judiciary’s evolving stance on marital disputes, particularly the relevance of irretrievable marital breakdowns in addressing issues of cruelty and desertion. By allowing a retrial, the Court ensures that the husband is not denied a fair opportunity to substantiate his claims and prevents rigid procedural technicalities from obstructing justice.

Date of Decision: November 21, 2024