Rajesh Pandey
While dealing a matrimonial case of twenty one years of spouse living separately, the Allahabad High Court has held that long separation coupled with criminal prosecution and harsh words spoken to spouse, without any desire to retrieve the matrimonial relationship shows an irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
While dismissing the appeal filed by one Arti Tiwari, a division bench comprising Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Donadi Ramesh held that the marriage between the parties had irretrievably broken down.
Arti had filed the appeal, challenging the judgment and decree by which her marriage was dissolved, by the additional principal judge, family court, Kanpur Nagar.
While dealing with a matrimonial case of 21 years of separation, court held “Desertion suffered over long years in a young marriage, accompanied with harsh words spoken and complete lack of desire and effort on part of the deserting spouse to cohabit as also lodging of criminal case alleging demand of dowry only after institution of divorce case proceeding by the other spouse and pursuing it in appeal to secure conviction (after initial acquittal) does indicate in any case, the marriage between the parties is irretrievably broken down.”
In the present case, the parties got married in the year 2000. After a few days of the marriage, appellant-wife claimed that she was feeling unsafe in the marital house as only male members were present in the house. Thereafter, the respondent-husband moved with her to Bareilly, his place of work, where she did not stay for long and moved to Kanpur Nagar stating that she was practicing as an advocate.
Even when the husband rented premises at Kanpur Nagar, the wife preferred to stay at her paternal home. Eventually, the husband moved to stay with his family in Unnao.
They had a daughter in 2002 and finally they started living separately in 2003.
The husband had alleged that the appellant-wife misbehaved with his family member, used harsh words and threatened to file false criminal cases against them.
The court, while dismissing the appeal in its decision dated September 4, observed that the appellant-wife instituted a criminal case against the husband after he had instituted divorce proceedings. It was observed that the allegations regarding the demand for dowry and cruelty were made for the first time after the institution of divorce proceedings after six years of marriage and she had no will or desire to live with her husband.
======