KOCHI: A woman making discreet phone calls to another man frequently disregarding her husband’s warning, that too at odd hours, amounts to matrimonial cruelty, the Kerala High Court held while granting divorce to a couple.
A division bench issued the order while allowing the appeal filed by a man challenging the order of the Family Court, Muvattupuzha, dismissing the plea for dissolution of marriage on the ground of adultery and cruelty. However, the court made it clear that merely because the wife used to make calls to another person regularly, it cannot jump to a conclusion that there was an adulterous act between them.
The court also said a false initiation of criminal prosecution by the wife against the husband and his parents post their reunion after remaining estranged amounts to mental cruelty. The court stated that evidence on record shows that the husband and the wife were at loggerheads right from the inception of their marriage and could not patch up their differences over the past 12 years.
The husband has pleaded and proved specific instances of cruelty meted out to him by the wife. They have been residing separately since November 2012. Thus, the court held that the husband has made out a case for granting a decree for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty under section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act. According to the husband, the wife has been maintaining an illicit relationship with her colleague before their marriage and even thereafter.
The counsel for the husband produced printouts of call records showing that there were frequent calls between the wife and the person and argued that it suggests an unholy relationship between them. However, the court declined to interfere with the findings on adultery by the family court.
The High Court observed that physical violence is not a mandatory aspect of what constitutes cruelty. Further, it held that if the conduct of one spouse towards the other causes reasonable apprehension in the mind of the latter that it is not safe for him or her to continue the marital relationship, it amounts to cruelty.
In this case, the court noted that there were instances where the wife made calls during odd hours as well. According to the husband, she continued making calls with that person ignoring his warning.
The court said it shows she continued to make telephone conversations with another person on almost all days, and several times on a single day, even after she realised that her husband did not like her making such calls. This evidence suggests matrimonial cruelty, court observed.
While considering the plea, the High Court stated that merely from the evidence that the wife used to make calls to another person regularly, it cannot jump to a conclusion that there was an adulterous act between them