“Expecting a wife to do all the household work reflects regressive mindset and in modern society, the burden of household responsibilities have to be borne by both husband and wife equally and primitive mindset needs to undergo a positive change,” the Bombay High Court observed.
The High Court dismissed an appeal by a 35-year-old man from Pune, who challenged the March 2018 verdict of the Family Court that dismissed his plea for dissolution of marriage with his 33-year-old estranged-wife.
The man, who alleged cruelty by the estranged wife, had claimed that the two, who are working persons, have been living apart for about 10 years and there is irretrievable breakdown of marriage. However, the court said that the case to dissolve the marriage was not made out by the appellant man.
The man had alleged cruelty by claiming that his wife was in constant touch with her mother on mobile and was not doing any household work and on most occasions the appellant had to leave for his office without food. He further alleged that the respondent wife, upon being asked to conduct herself in a proper manner by his parents, would abuse them.
A division bench of Justice Nitin W Sambre and Justice Sharmila U Deshmukh on September 6 rejected an appeal by the man argued through advocate A P Singh. The couple got married in 2010 as per Hindu Vedic rites in Bihar and after coming to Pune, they registered the marriage under Special Marriage Act in March, 2011.
It was also alleged that in 2011, the respondent wife abused him for not attending her father’s house warming Pooja due to his work commitment and in a fit of anger, she pressed his neck and scratched his face with her nails.
The appellant alleged that in 2012, when he went to his bedroom to sleep, his wife and her mother kicked him out of bed and called the building security guard and threw him out of the house. He also alleged that his mother-in-law slapped him in presence of the guard and also instigated her daughter not to keep quiet and to break his head with a cooker.
Moreover, the following year, as per the appellant, when he had gone to meet his wife and their recently born child, he was not allowed to meet the infant and she constantly abused him, “which was silently borne by the appellant for the sake of the child”.
The appellant also informed that his wife came to her matrimonial house along with her brother and her mother and left the house with all her personal belongings. Later, in March 2013, the wife lodged a police complaint. It was also argued that while he and his father tried to reconcile, the appellant’s father-in-law abused them and her uncle threatened him and caused mental and physical cruelty.
Advocate Amey D Deshpande appearing for the wife opposed the plea and claimed it to be non-maintainable. Deshpande said the respondent wife had been subjected to mental and physical cruelty at the hands of the appellant.
Most Read
The High Court observed that the appellant cited three alleged isolated incidents, however, “cruelty generally does not consist of isolated acts but a series of acts spread over a period of time”.
“The primitive mindset expecting the woman of the house to solely shoulder the household responsibilities needs to undergo a positive change. Also, the marital relationship cannot result in isolating the respondent-wife from her parents and she cannot be expected to sever all ties with her parents after her marriage,” Justice Deshmukh noted for the bench.
“Being in contact with one’s parents cannot by any stretch of imagination be construed as inflicting mental agony on the other party. In our view, putting restrictions on the respondent to curtail her contact with her parents, has in fact, subjected the respondent to mental cruelty apart from physical cruelty which has been established,” the High Court held while dismissing the appeal.