Cognizance Is of the Offence, Not the Offender: Madras High Court Rejects Challenge to ED’s Supplementary Complaint in PMLA Case Acquittal in Rajasthan No Bar to Trial in Madhya Pradesh: MP High Court Rejects Double Jeopardy Plea in Antiquities Theft Case 20% Deposit Isn’t Automatic in Cheque Bounce Appeals: Right to Appeal Can’t Be Priced Out: Punjab & Haryana High Court Checks Mechanical Use of Section 148 NI Act A Child Is Not a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets New Benchmark in Compensation for Minors’ Deaths 90 Days Is Not Sacrosanct – Courts Can Permit Reply to Counter-Claim Even Beyond Prescribed Time in Interest of Justice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Magistrate Can Proceed Only for Offences Committed in India Until Sanction Is Obtained for Acts Outside India: Orissa High Court on International Financial Fraud Award Is Vitiated by Non-Consideration of Material Evidence: Orissa High Court Sets Aside Industrial Tribunal’s Wage Award in IMFA Case POCSO | Absence of Child's Name in Birth Certificate Not Fatal: Kerala High Court No One Has the Right to Impute Illicit Motives to Judges in the Name of Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Jails Man for Criminal Contempt DV Complaint Cannot Be Quashed at Threshold Under Article 227: Madras High Court Refuses to Interfere, Directs Accused to Seek Remedy Before Magistrate Recovery Wasn't From Accused's Exclusive Knowledge — Cylinder Already Marked in Site Plan Before Arrest: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man in Murder Case Setting Fire to House Where Only Minors Were Present is a Heinous Offence – No Quashing Merely Because Parties Settled: Calcutta High Court No Exclusive Possession Means Licence, Not Lease: Calcutta High Court Rules City Civil Court Has Jurisdiction to Evict Licensees Defendant's Own Family Attested the Sale Agreement – Yet She Called It Nominal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Specific Performance Renewal Not Automatic, No Evidence Of Notice Or Mutual Agreement: AP High Court Dismisses Indian Oil’s Appeal Against Eviction When Death Is Caused by an Unforeseeable Forest Fire, Criminal Prosecution Cannot Be Sustained Without Proof of Rashness, Negligence, or Knowledge: Supreme Court Proof of Accident Alone is Not Enough – Claimants Must Prove Involvement of Offending Vehicle Under Section 166 MV Act: Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal for Compensation in Fatal Road Accident Case Income Tax | Search Means Search, Not ‘Other Person’: Section 153C Collapses When the Assessee Himself Is Searched: Karnataka High Court Draws a Clear Red Line License Fee on Hoardings is Regulatory, Not Tax; GST Does Not Bar Municipal Levy: Bombay High Court Filing Forged Bank Statement to Mislead Court in Maintenance Case Is Prima Facie Offence Under Section 466 IPC: Allahabad High Court Upholds Summoning Continued Cruelty and Concealment of Infertility Justify Divorce: Chhattisgarh High Court Upholds Divorce Disguising Punishment as Simplicity Is Abuse of Power: Delhi High Court Quashes Dismissals of Civil Defence Volunteers for Being Stigmatic, Not Simpliciter Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD"

Delhi High Court Grants Divorce - Prolonged Separation and Mutual Cruelty”

06 September 2024 5:54 AM

By: Admin


On 19 October 2023, in a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court granted a divorce on the grounds of prolonged separation and mutual cruelty in the case of Rashmi Sharma vs. Deepak Sharma. The judgment, pronounced on October 19, 2023, sets a precedent for cases where matrimonial relationships have irretrievably broken down.

The Hon’ble Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna presided over the case. The divorce was granted under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, following a petition by the husband, Deepak Sharma, seeking the dissolution of his marriage to Rashmi Sharma.

The judgment noted that the couple had been living separately for more than a decade since 2012, and there was no possibility of reconciliation. It observed that “long separation and deprivation of conjugal relationship, with almost an impossible chance of reconciliation, is an extreme kind of cruelty.”

The Court also considered the conduct of both parties during their marriage. It took note of various incidents claimed by the husband, including allegations of cruelty and abusive behavior by the wife. However, the Court found that the appellant-wife had not been able to justify the grounds on which these complaints were made.

Furthermore, the judgment addressed an application filed by the wife seeking permanent maintenance under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1995, for the child born from their wedlock. The Court granted the appellant liberty to seek relief under the appropriate provisions of the law.

In a society where matrimonial disputes often become complex and emotionally charged, this judgment emphasizes the importance of evaluating each case on its peculiar facts and circumstances. It underscores the significance of mutual trust, compatibility, and congeniality in a marriage, and the consequences of unfounded allegations and prolonged separation.

Date of Decision: 19 October 2023

RASHMI SHARMA   vs DEEPAK SHARMA 

Latest Legal News