Motor Insurance Policy Covers Cross-Border Travel If Specifically Authorized By Valid Permit Under MVA: Supreme Court Petrol Pumps Act As 'Commission Agents' For Mahanagar Gas, Liable To Pay Service Tax Under Business Auxiliary Service: Supreme Court Supreme Court Refuses To Dilute 'Bangalore Water Supply' Ratio, Affirms Worker Protection Remains The Core Of Industrial Disputes Act Order XXII Rule 9(3) CPC | Application Under Section 5 Limitation Act Must Be Filed Separately To Condonate Delay In Setting Aside Abatement: Supreme Court Principle Of Parity | Supreme Court Extends Benefit Of Fixed-Term Sentence To Co-Accused Based On Remission Period Right To Catch Fish Amounts To 'Profit à Prendre' And Is Compulsorily Registrable As A Lease Under Section 17(1)(d) Registration Act: Supreme Court Supreme Court Mandates Adoption Of Guidelines To Inculcate Sensitivity And Compassion In Judicial Processes For Sexual Offences 'Last Seen' Circumstance Is Weak Without Corroboration: Supreme Court Acquits Murder Accused PSEB | Pre-Regularization Service Must Be Counted As Qualifying Service For Pensionary Benefits: Supreme Court Writ Of Quo Warranto Cannot Be Used For Redress Of Personal Grievances By Unsuccessful Candidates In Selection Process: Supreme Court 'Case Of No Investigation': Supreme Court Acquits Murder Accused Citing 'Shoddy' Police Work And Lack Of Forensic Evidence 'Status Quo Cannot Be Vacated Without Appropriate Security': Supreme Court Directs Additional ₹200 Crores Deposit In RAKIA-Matrix Case SARFAESI Act | 'Bank' As Assignee Can Invoke Recovery Measures Even If Debt Was Originally Created By Non-Notified Financial Institution: Supreme Court 'CBI Failed Miserably': Supreme Court Tears Into 'Fabricated' Case, Acquits Bank Manager In 35-Year-Old Corruption Trial Mere Delay In Tax Deposit Cannot Be Equated With Non-Payment: Supreme Court Quashes Penalty On Saudi Arabian Airlines Revisional Power Under Section 56 Karnataka Land Revenue Act Cannot Be Invoked Beyond Three-Year Limitation Period: Supreme Court Prosecution Can’t Use Known Locations To Create 'Discovery' Fiction: Supreme Court Rejects Site Plan As Evidence Irretrievable Breakdown Of Marriage And Long-Term Separation Constitute Valid Grounds For Divorce Under Section 13(1)(ib) HMA: Supreme Court 'Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt Is A Guideline And Not A Fetish': Supreme Court Acquits Man In 2007 Murder Case Over Fragile Circumstantial Evidence Plea Of Juvenility Is A Jurisdictional Fact; High Court Must Recall Final Judgments Under Section 482 CrPC To Remedy Miscarriage Of Justice: Supreme Court SEBI | Professional Clearing Members Have No Statutory Obligation To Verify Credit/Debit Positions Of Individual Clients Of Trading Members: Supreme Court

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

Latest Legal News