False Complaints by Wife Amount to Cruelty, Prolonged Separation Constitutes Desertion: Madhya Pradesh High Court Grants Divorce

"Long separation, false criminal cases, and irretrievable breakdown of the marriage constitute cruelty and desertion under the Hindu Marriage Act, leaving no purpose in continuing the marital relationship." – Madhya Pradesh High Court, Justice Anand Pathak and Justice Hirdesh. On November 14, 2024, the Madhya Pradesh High Court allowed the appeal in First Appeal No. 1915 of 2022, filed by Ramcharan Raghuvanshi, and granted him a decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion under Sections 13(1)(i-a) and 13(1)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA).
The Court overturned the judgment of the Family Court, Ashok Nagar, which had dismissed the husband's divorce petition. Citing malicious litigation and prolonged separation of more than ten years as sufficient grounds for divorce, the High Court also held that the wife, being equally placed financially, was not entitled to permanent alimony.
The appellant, Ramcharan Raghuvanshi, and the respondent, Smt. Ujala, were married on April 26, 2014, as per Hindu rites. Shortly after marriage, disputes arose between the parties. The appellant alleged that the respondent:
Expressed her unwillingness to marry him, stating that she was forced into the marriage. Stayed at the matrimonial home for only three days initially and for about 13-14 days in total, refusing to consummate the marriage or perform household duties. Left the matrimonial home on June 25, 2014, taking valuables and threatening to implicate him and his family in false criminal cases if they tried to bring her back.
Criminal Litigation
Sections 324, 323, and 506 IPC: Alleging assault by the appellant.
Section 498-A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act: Alleging cruelty and harassment for dowry.
Both cases resulted in the appellant’s acquittal, as the allegations were found to be false.
The appellant filed for divorce under Sections 13(1)(i-a) (cruelty) and 13(1)(i-b) (desertion), claiming that the false complaints, prolonged separation, and lack of marital relationship amounted to cruelty and desertion. The Family Court dismissed his petition on November 16, 2022, holding that the appellant failed to prove cruelty and desertion.
Whether false criminal cases filed by the wife constituted cruelty under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act?
Whether prolonged separation without lawful justification amounted to desertion under Section 13(1)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act?
Whether the marital relationship had irretrievably broken down, warranting a decree of divorce?
Whether the wife was entitled to permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act?
The Court emphasized that malicious litigation initiated by one spouse, causing the other to endure emotional distress, amounts to mental cruelty. Relying on the Supreme Court's judgments in Rani Narasimha Sastry v. Rani Suneela Rani (2020) and Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh (2007), the Court observed:
The wife lodged two criminal cases, including one under Section 498-A IPC, against the appellant and his family members, which ultimately ended in acquittal.
The false allegations caused the appellant to undergo trial and mental agony, constituting mental cruelty under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
"False allegations and criminal prosecution that lead to acquittal constitute cruelty, as they cause immense emotional and reputational damage to the spouse." – [Para 10].
The Court held that the wife’s conduct constituted desertion under Section 13(1)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act. It reasoned:
The respondent left the matrimonial home on June 25, 2014, and had been living separately for more than ten years without lawful justification.
The wife refused to return despite repeated efforts by the husband to reconcile, showing an intention to permanently end cohabitation (animus deserendi).
Citing Bipinchandra Jaisinghbai Shah v. Prabhavati (1957), the Court reiterated that desertion is a matter of inference drawn from facts, including prolonged separation and the absence of valid reasons for leaving.
"Long separation coupled with animus deserendi amounts to desertion. Here, the respondent-wife’s refusal to return to the matrimonial home without cause satisfies the conditions for desertion." – [Para 13].
The Court observed that the marital relationship had irretrievably broken down, as:
The parties had lived separately for over ten years, with no efforts at reconciliation bearing fruit.
The bitterness and animosity between the spouses rendered the marriage a mere legal fiction.
Relying on Naveen Kohli v. Neelu Kohli (2006), the Court emphasized that in cases of irretrievable breakdown, continuing the marriage would only prolong the agony of both parties.
"Long separation and the irreparable breakdown of all meaningful bonds between spouses justify a decree of divorce." – [Para 15].
The Court denied the respondent’s claim for permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, as:
Both parties were primary school teachers employed in government jobs and earning similar incomes.
The respondent’s financial status was sufficient to sustain her independently.
"Permanent alimony is not warranted when both spouses are equally placed in terms of earning capacity and financial independence." – [Para 17].
The High Court allowed the appeal, overturning the Family Court’s decision, and granted a decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion. The key directives were:
The appellant-husband was granted a decree of divorce under Sections 13(1)(i-a) and 13(1)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
The respondent-wife was not entitled to permanent alimony, considering her equal earning capacity.
Both parties were directed to bear their own costs.
"The prolonged separation, false litigation, and irretrievable breakdown of marriage justify granting a decree of divorce to prevent further mental and emotional suffering for both parties."
False complaints by one spouse, leading to acquittal, amount to mental cruelty.
Prolonged separation without valid justification constitutes desertion.

Courts can grant a divorce decree when a marriage has irretrievably broken down, with no possibility of reconciliation.
By balancing the facts of the case and established legal principles, the Madhya Pradesh High Court highlighted the importance of protecting individuals from marital relationships that have lost all purpose and meaning.

Date of Judgment: November 14, 2024