Limitation | Delay Condonation Cannot Be An Act Of Generosity: Supreme Court Refuses To Condone 31-Year Delay To Challenge Decree Sentence Suspension In Murder Cases Only Under Exceptional Circumstances; Presumption Of Innocence Erased Upon Conviction: Supreme Court Inquiry Commission Report Cannot Be Used For Disciplinary Action If Statutory Right To Cross-Examine Denied: Gauhati High Court Use Of Trademark On Website Accessible In India Constitutes Domestic Use, Geo-Blocking Mandatory For Territorial Restrictions: Delhi High Court Civil Court Jurisdiction To Interfere With DRT Proceedings Is Absolutely Barred Even For Third Parties: Madras High Court Adding a Prefix Can’t Erase Deceptive Similarity – Delhi High Court Orders Removal of ‘ARUN’ from Trademark ‘AiC ARUN’ Cannot Resile From Mediated Settlement After Taking Benefits: Supreme Court Quashes Wife's DV Case, Grants Divorce Absolute Indemnity Obligation Triggers Immediately Upon Court-Directed Deposit, Not On Final Appeal: Supreme Court Magistrate Directing Investigation Under Section 156(3) CrPC Only Requires Prima Facie Satisfaction Of Cognizable Offence: Supreme Court Cancellation Of Sale Deed Under Specific Relief Act Not A Pre-Condition To Initiate Criminal Case For Forgery: Supreme Court Amalgamated Company Cannot Claim Set-Off Of Predecessor's Losses Under Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act Without Specific Statutory Provision: Supreme Court Overlapping Split Chargesheets May Raise Double Jeopardy Concerns, Supreme Court Notes While Granting Bail To Former Jharkhand Minister Supreme Court Grants Bail To Convicted Ex-Jharkhand Minister Facing Overlapping Prosecutions From Split Chargesheets Electricity Act Appellate Authority Is A Quasi-Judicial Body Subject To High Court’s Supervisory Jurisdiction: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mere Discrepancy In Date Of Birth Across Certificates Doesn't Amount To Fraud If No Undue Advantage Is Derived: Allahabad High Court Interest Earned On Funds Temporarily Parked Pending Project Deployment Cannot Be Taxed As 'Income From Other Sources': Delhi High Court Reference Court Cannot Set Aside Collector's Award Or Remand Matter For Fresh Determination: Allahabad High Court Administrative Transfer Causing Revenue Loss Defies Court Process: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Ferry Ghat Handover Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High Court

False and Defamatory Complaints Can Amount to Cruelty in Divorce Cases: Delhi High Court

06 September 2024 5:48 AM

By: Admin


In a recent ruling, the Delhi High Court has established a significant precedent, stating that false and defamatory complaints filed by one spouse against the other and their family members can constitute an act of cruelty, justifying divorce. The judgment, delivered by a bench consisting of SURESH KUMAR KAIT and NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, sheds light on the critical aspect of cruelty in divorce cases.

The case revolved around a couple seeking divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) and Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The judgment analyzed the conduct of both parties, with a particular focus on the appellant-wife's actions.

The court's ruling emphasized that the appellant-wife's unfounded accusations and defamatory complaints against her husband and his family members amounted to cruelty. The judgment cited several legal precedents, including the Supreme Court's decisions in cases such as Samar Ghosh Vs. Jaya Ghosh and Ravi Kumar vs. Julmidevi, which affirmed that reckless and false accusations against a spouse and their family members could lower their reputation in society, constituting cruelty under the law.

Additionally, the court highlighted the husband's repeated efforts at reconciliation, which were met with resistance by the wife. The judgment noted that despite the husband's attempts to reconcile, the wife's animus deserendi, or intention to abandon the marital relationship, became evident.

This landmark ruling not only provides clarity on the grounds for divorce but also underscores the importance of responsible conduct in matrimonial disputes. It serves as a reminder that false and defamatory complaints should not be used as tools for revenge in marital conflicts.

This decision by the Delhi High Court sets a valuable precedent for future divorce cases, emphasizing the need for fairness, truthfulness, and sensitivity in resolving disputes within matrimonial relationships.

Date of Decision: 11 OCTOBER  2023

TAPSI VIDYARTHI vs ARVIND KUMAR SINGH

Latest Legal News