POCSO Trial Court Cannot Suo Motu Order Assistance Of Special Educator Without First Assessing Competency Of Victim: Madras High Court Compassionate Appointment Claim Cannot Be Rejected On Ground Of Deceased Employee's Service Record If Not In Policy: Madhya Pradesh HC Limitation For Filing Written Statement In Commercial Suits Triggers From Service Of Summons With Plaint: Telangana High Court Administrative Order Using 'Unsatisfactory Performance' For Tenure Curtailment Not Stigmatic: Supreme Court ICAR Employees Do Not Hold 'Civil Posts', No Protection Under Article 311; No Enforceable Right To Complete Five-Year Tenure: Supreme Court Husband Cannot Claim Maintenance From Wife Under Section 144 BNSS (Section 125 CrPC): Allahabad High Court Imposes ₹15 Lakh Cost Divorce Petition Under Special Marriage Act Maintainable Even If Marriage Is Not Registered Under The Act: Karnataka High Court Section 82 CrPC Mandatory Procedure Must Be Strictly Followed To Declare A Person Proclaimed Offender: Punjab & Haryana High Court Schools Must Admit RTE Students Allotted By Govt Without Delay; Cannot Sit In Appeal Over State’s Decision: Supreme Court Insufficient Stamping Of Corporate Guarantee Is A Curable Defect, Won't Invalidate 'Financial Debt' Status Under IBC: Supreme Court Wildlife Species Ought Not To Be Confined To Cages Save In Exceptional Circumstances; Supreme Court Upholds Translocation Of Deer From Hauz Khas Park Digital Penetration Constitutes Rape Under Section 375(b) IPC; Degree Of Penetration Irrelevant: Bombay High Court (Goa Bench) Delhi High Court Denies Bail To 'Digital Arrest' Scam Accused; Says Mule Account Holders Are Important Cogs Of Conspiratorial Wheel Salary Is 'Property' Under Article 300-A, Cannot Be Withheld Without Due Process Of Law: Bombay High Court Inept Investigation Or Scripted Enquiry Fatal To Prosecution: Supreme Court Acquits 11 Convicts In Assam Murder Case Inconvenience Of Travel Not A Ground To Transfer Suit; Use Video Conferencing Or Commission For Evidence: Orissa High Court Part-Time Workers Serving For Decades Entitled To Regularization; 'Uma Devi' Ruling Cannot Be Weaponized To Deny Legitimate Claims: Rajasthan High Court Order Rejecting Or Allowing To Register FIR U/S Section 156(3) CrPC Application Is Not Interlocutory; Criminal Revision Is Maintainable: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Marriage Loses Its Sanctity When Conflicts Take the Form of Disrespect: Delhi HC Grants Divorce in Favor of Celebrity Chef Facing Continuous Marital Cruelty

01 August 2025 9:33 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the High Court of Delhi, presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Hon'ble Ms. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, has granted divorce to xxx, a celebrity chef, observing that "marriage loses its sanctity when conflicts take the form of disrespect and inconsideration towards their spouse."

The judgment revolves around an appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, challenging the dismissal of a divorce petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Appellant contended that the behavior of his wife amounted to marital cruelty.

The parties, married in 2008, experienced continual discord marked by allegations of cruelty. The Appellant, a renowned chef, accused his wife, xxx, of physical abuse, humiliation, and baseless allegations affecting his career and public image. The issues primarily concerned whether these actions constituted cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Marital Discord and Cruelty: The court observed that continuous conflicts, disrespect, and the Appellant’s humiliation and public embarrassment due to false allegations by the Respondent constituted marital cruelty.

Impact on Child and Family Life: The aggressive behavior and verbal altercations of the Respondent in the presence of their minor child contributed to an unhealthy environment, further supporting the Appellant's plea for divorce.

False Allegations: The court held that unfounded accusations by the Respondent, including dowry demands and infidelity, amounted to cruelty, adversely impacting the Appellant's mental well-being and public image.

Financial and Household Responsibilities: The Respondent’s refusal to contribute to household responsibilities, despite not being employed, and her unreasonable demands placed significant strain on the Appellant.

Physical Abuse and Public Humiliation: The Appellant faced physical abuse and public humiliation, including incidents where the Respondent called the police to their home and the Appellant’s workplace, leading to considerable distress.

Decision: The High Court set aside the judgment dated 01.10.2018 of the Family Court and granted divorce to the Appellant under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, due to the Respondent's cruelty.

Date of Decision: April 02, 2024.

xxx vs. xxx

 

Latest Legal News