The Power Under Order XXXVIII, Rule 5 CPC is Drastic and Extraordinary; Should Not Be Exercised Mechanically or Merely for the Asking: Calcutta High Court Telangana High Court Strikes Down Section 10-A: Upholds Transparency in Public Employment Absence of Homogeneous Mixing and Procedural Deficiencies Vitiate NDPS Conviction: Punjab and Haryana High Court Business Disputes Cannot Be Given Criminal Color: Patna High Court Quashes Complaint in Trademark Agreement Case Gujarat High Court Appoints Wife as Guardian of Comatose Husband, Calls for Legislative Framework Standard of Proof in Professional Misconduct Requires 'Higher Threshold' but Below 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Delhi High Court Calcutta High Court Allows Amendment of Pleadings Post-Trial: Necessary for Determining Real Questions in Controversy Exaggerated Allegations in Matrimonial Disputes Cause Irreparable Suffering, Even Acquittal Can't Erase Scars: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Relatives in Matrimonial Dispute Consent Requires Active Deliberation; False Promise of Marriage Must Be Proximate Cause for Sexual Relations: Supreme Court Urgency Clause in Land Acquisition for Yamuna Expressway Upheld: Supreme Court Affirms Public Interest in Integrated Development Interest Rate of 24% Compounded Annually Held Excessive; Adjusted to Ensure Fairness in Loan Transactions: AP HC Prosecution Under IPC After Factories Act Conviction Violates Article 20(2): Bombay High Court Join Our Exclusive Lawyer E News WhatsApp Group!

Patna High Court Upholds Family Court’s Decision: Inability to bear child is not a ground for divorce

04 September 2024 10:45 AM

By: Admin


In a recent ruling, the High Court of Judicature at Patna upheld the decision of the Family Court, Muzaffarpur, dismissing a petition for divorce filed by Sonu Kumar against his wife, Rina Devi. The appellant had sought the dissolution of his marriage on the grounds of cruelty, alleging improper behavior, refusal to cohabit, and making unreasonable demands.

However, the High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice P. B. Bajanthri and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jitendra Kumar, carefully examined the evidence presented and concluded that the appellant failed to prove specific allegations of cruelty. In particular, the allegation of refusal to cohabit was not considered reliable, as the wife was in touch with the appellant even after returning to her parental home.

“The refusal of cohabitation does not hold ground,” the court emphasized, noting that the appellant did not take any legal steps for restitution of conjugal rights, which would have been an appropriate remedy in such circumstances.

Furthermore, the court observed that the appellant’s motive for seeking a divorce was to remarry and have children with another woman, as he had learned about his wife’s health issues that might affect her ability to bear children. However, the inability to bear children was deemed not a valid ground for dissolving the marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act.

“Such possibility of inability to bear a child may be part of the marital life of anybody and parties to a marriage may resort to other means for having a child, such as adoption,” the court emphasized.

The High Court’s decision highlights the importance of understanding the grounds for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act and reiterates that motive alone cannot be a basis for seeking divorce.

Date of Decision: 19-07-2023

Sonu Kumar vs Rina Devi

Similar News