Allahabad High Court: In an appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, arising from the judgment and order passed by the Family Court, whereby the Court has dissolved the marriage between the parties without making any provision for permanent alimony etc, the division bench of Saumitra Dayal Singh and Donadi Ramesh, JJ. held that the act of cruelty alleged by the husband is proven. To that extent, the Court said that the decree of the Family Court calls for no interference. However, the Court directed a lump sum alimony of Rs. 10,00,000/- to be paid to the wife not later than 31-12-2024.
The marriage between the parties, which took place in 2002, has been marked by significant conflict, culminating in the wife’s filing for divorce in 2006 after leaving the husband, whom she accuses of cruelty. The husband claims that the wife abandoned him on December 2, 2006, and has since made no efforts to reconcile. The husband has accused the wife of cruelty due to a false criminal case she filed against him and his family under Sections 498A, 323, 504, and 506 of the Penal Code, 1860, as well as Section 3 read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, alleging demands for dowry.
The Court noted that the first FIR was lodged after six years of marriage and the second was lodged almost two months after the divorce suit had been instituted by the wife. The Court further noted that the husband and his parents have been acquitted in the criminal case, as at the stage of evidence, the wife could not support the allegations, and she turned hostile. Thus, the Court concluded that a specific pleading of cruelty did exist. The act of cruelty of causing arrest of the parents of the husband on false allegation of criminal offence, was proven.
The Court rejected the submission of the wife that the allegation of demand of dowry giving rise to the criminal prosecution lodged by her, arose only by way of a bona fide counter blast to the divorce case proceeding instituted by the husband and that it was never intended to lead to such harsh consequence of dissolution of marriage between the parties.
The Court remarked that for the act of cruelty committed, once arrest of parents of a spouse is caused on false allegations or allegations found to be false during a criminal trial, no further or strict proof of cruelty may be prescribed or applied by Courts.
The Court said that the husband was meted out with most cruel behaviour in which he may have reasonably felt unsafe to cohabit with the wife. The act committed by the wife led to loss of reputation and standing of the husband and his family, in society. Having suffered that, the husband cannot be expected to cope with that and revive his matrimonial relations.
Thus, the Court held that the act of cruelty alleged by the husband is proven. To that extent, the Court said that the decree of the Family Court calls for no interference.
Concerning the permanent alimony, while noting that the wife is herself gainfully employed being a part of teaching faculty at a respectable institute having monthly income about Rs. 60,000/-, and further keeping in mind the fact that the son born to the parties has attained the age of majority, the Court directed a lump sum alimony of Rs. 10,00,000/- to be paid to her not later than 31-12-2024. Failing that, the same will attract interest at 8% from the date of this order till the date of its actual payment.
Thus, the Court partly allowed the appeal.
[Tripti Singh v. Ajat Shatru, 2024 SCC OnLine All 5542, decided on 17-09-2024]
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
