Chennai: Holding that lodging a complaint with the police to get back her articles by the wife cannot be construed to have caused cruelty to the husband, the Madras high court has upheld an order of a family court, which dismissed the petition filed by the husband for divorce on the ground of cruelty and allowed the petition filed by the wife for restitution of conjugal rights.
A division bench comprising Justices A.Selvam and P.Kalaiyarasan dismissed the petition filed by the husband, challenging the common order passed by a family court in Chennai dated August 30, 2017.
The bench said the marriage between the husband and the wife was solemnised on September 6, 2009, as per Hindu rites and customs at Chennai and they were not blessed with any child. The main allegation of cruelty was that the wife was very adamant from the beginning and she left the matrimonial home on July 13, 2010, without any valid reason. It was further alleged that she lodged a criminal complaint which led the husband to move the court for anticipatory bail. The wife has also admitted that she left the matrimonial home, after the demise of her father. Further she says that she was not treated properly. Therefore, it cannot be said that she left the matrimonial home without any justifiable reason, the bench added.
The bench said the complaint given by the wife discloses that the same was lodged to get back her articles from her husband. But the husband moved anticipatory bail application, apprehending that case has been filed under section 498-A (cruelty by husband or his relatives) IPC. Lodging the complaint with the police to get back her articles by the wife cannot be construed to have caused cruelty to the husband, the bench added.
The bench said the husband originally filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights. Only after lodging the complaint with the police by the wife, he changed his mind and filed a petition for divorce on the ground of cruelty. Considering the sudden change in attitude of the husband, the alleged adamant attitude, leaving the matrimonial home and taking away all her articles and belongings from the matrimonial home cannot be considered sufficient, warranting for divorce on the ground of cruelty, the bench added.
The bench said though the wife makes an allegation of impotency as against her husband, she still believes that it was curable one and she being a homeopathy doctor, herself administered medicines. The intention of the wife was to live with her husband and not to severe her marital relationship. The trial court after analysing both oral and documentary evidence, has rightly dismissed the petition for divorce and allowed the petition for restitution of conjugal rights, the bench added.
