The Jharkhand High Court has held that a husband insisting that his wife live with him and the woman with whom he is having an extramarital affair amounts to mental cruelty of the highest degree.

The Court dissolved the couple’s marriage, observing that the husband’s attempt to portray the other woman as his “younger sister” had irreparably damaged the trust underlying their marital relationship.

A Division Bench of Justices Sujit Narayan Prasad and Pradeep Kumar Srivastava allowed an appeal filed by the wife, a medical practitioner, challenging a November 2023 order of the Family Court at Hazaribagh that had dismissed her divorce petition under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

The High Court observed that the Family Court had assessed the evidence in isolation rather than considering it collectively in accordance with the principle of preponderance of probabilities applicable to matrimonial disputes.

“Marriage is a relationship built on mutual trust, companionship and shared experiences. Relationship of wife and husband is based on the trust and respect to have upon each other and if it is broken it is non-repairable as the trust is the foundation of marriage,” the Bench observed.

The couple, both doctors, married in February 2018 and initially lived together in Dhanbad. While the husband was posted at a Primary Health Centre in Tundi, the wife worked with Bharat Coking Coal Limited (BCCL).

They began living separately in September 2019. The wife alleged that her husband was involved in an extramarital relationship with a widow. According to her, despite executing a written undertaking during a family intervention to end the relationship and cease contact with the woman, the husband continued the affair.

She further alleged that when she objected to the relationship, her husband physically assaulted her with household objects, including a broom and a mop stick. The alleged assaults caused medical complications, including a slipped disc and traumatic osteoarthritis.

The husband denied the allegations and claimed that the medical prescriptions relied upon by his wife were fabricated, as they had been issued by a clinic owned by her father. He had also obtained an ex-parte decree for restitution of conjugal rights in January 2023.

Rejecting the husband's objection to the medical evidence, the High Court held that the documents could not be discarded merely because they originated from a clinic owned by the wife's father. The Bench further observed that the husband's conduct had compelled the wife to leave the matrimonial home.

Relying on the Supreme Court's judgment in Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh, the High Court also noted that the parties had been living separately since 2019, reflecting the irreparable damage to their marital relationship.

Accordingly, the Bench set aside the Family Court's order and dissolved the marriage. It also granted the wife liberty to approach the Family Court for permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Advocates Abhishek Thakur and Pratyush Navneet appeared for the wife, while Advocate Soumitra Baroi represented the husband.