MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

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