Matrimonial Cruelty As A Ground For Divorce

Since time immemorial marriage has been the greatest and most important of all institutions in human society. It has always existed in one form or another in every culture, ensuring social sanction to a physical union between man and woman and laying the foundation for building up of the family, the basic unit of society.

For Hindus, marriage is a sacrosanct union. It is also an important social institution. Marriages in India are between two families, rather two individuals, arranged marriages and dowry are customary. The society as well as the Indian legislation attempt to protect marriage. Indian society is predominantly patriarchal so, there are stringent gender roles, with women having a passive role and husband an active dominating role. Marriage and motherhood are the primary status roles for women.

The goal of marriage in Hinduism is to foster, not self-interest, but self-restraint and love for the entire family, which keeps the family united and prevents its breakdown.

The marriage creates reciprocal rights and duties and obligations and the important one is the right to society of marital intercourse with an end explicit obedience to the other party. Therefore, both the spouses are under obligation to carry on the marriage. But fortunately or unfortunately if either of the spouse deliberately breaks the marriage tie or neglects or avoids carrying out the obligation without any fault of the other, then the innocent party has been given some rights against the defaulter spouse like divorce.

Before 1955 era, it was not so easy to get divorced for a Hindu person because as per Hindu Religion, the marriage was considered as a pious knot. So we cannot find any provision for Divorce in uncodified Hindu Law that is known as, Shashtras, Puranas, Ved and other pious or holly books related with Hindu Religion. Considering various stigmas in social life of the Hindu, the parliament decided to enact laws related with the Hindu though; it was a difficult task to do so.

The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 revolves round the valid marriage between the Hindu, Valid rites of Hindu marriage, provisions for maintenance and divorce. The provisions for divorce as well as judicial separation have been taken from the concept of Western theory. So, the western theory has been entered by way of codification in Hindu Society and Cruelty is one of the grounds of DIVORCE and JUDICIAL SPERATION between the parties. This article talks about cruelty, cruelty under Hindu Marriage act, can husband get divorce on grounds of cruelty, cruelty as a ground for divorce under hindu law, mental cruelty as a ground for divorce and divorce on the ground of cruelty.

MATRIMONIAL CRUELTY MEANING:

Matrimonial Cruelty meaning has not been defined in the matrimonial laws. It has been the policy of legislation to avoid such a definition. Section 2 is the interpretation clause of the HMA. But neither in Section 2 nor in any section of the Act, has the meaning of the word cruelty been mentioned. So in this case, the respected court has to depend on external aid in each case. Our honorable supreme court of India has been depending on the decisions of English courts regarding this matter since the commencement of the Act. After verifying various decisions of the honorable judiciary of our country, we can give the meaning of cruelty as such:

1. Cruelty includes physical and mental cruelty.

2. Cruelty is the res geste (the events) that adverse affects on the mental and physical health, social status and life style of the other party.

In Shobha Rani v. Madhukar Reddi, [(1988) 1 SCC 105, while dealing with “cruelty” under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Act, this Court observed that the said provision does not define “cruelty” and the same could not be defined. “Cruelty” may be mental or physical, intentional or unintentional. 

 In Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh, (2007) 4 SCC 511, Court considered the concept of cruelty and referring to Oxford Dictionary defines ”cruelty‘ as ”the quality of being cruel; disposition of inflicting suffering; delight in or indifference to another’s pain; mercilessness; hard-heartedness’.

We can articulate that cruelty refers to violent acts. However, a mere quarrel, petty outrageous behavior or differences between the spouses does not come in the ambit of matrimonial cruelty meaning because this is something that is common in a day to day married life. Conducts that would amount to cruelty should be grave and severe in nature. Grave violence doesn’t always mean physical violence. Though physical violence is an essential factor that constitutes cruelty but apart from that a continuous process of ill-treatment or mental or physical torture to either of the spouse would also amount to cruelty. 

CRULETY AS A GROUND FOR DIVORCE:

The day to day situations in a matrimonial life creates an ambiguity within the couples to lead their life with each other peacefully. Although there is no such exhaustive definition to what all condition would lead to an offence of matrimonial cruelty but if we go through a case of marital abuse happening around us, then we can conclude of certain conditions under matrimonial cruelty meaning as:

• The physical violence on the spouse. 
• Having affairs or committing adultery with not just the spouse’s knowledge but even publically accepting it.
• And also in cases where either of the spouses is falsely accused of committing adultery.
• The constant manifestation of agony, rage with the addition of yelling or abusing at the spouse. 
• Demoralizing and restricting the spouse by every means to be an independent individual and compelling the spouse to be in a marital relationship where the spouse is left with no other option but to depend on the other. 
• Not disclosing any fact or incident of an acquired sexually transmitted disease while they are already into marital life. And the list goes on.

The conduct by either of the spouse should be of such a nature which should fall in the ambit of cruelty under the Matrimonial Law. The Court needs to look after all the background and circumstances because of which the couple wants to get separated. Basically, the Court has to investigate the reason for the deterioration of the marriage.

Divorce in general terms means the dissolution of a marriage with the help of a lawyer and by the prescribed Law. One can go for divorce when either of the parties or both of them want to get separated and free themselves from the existing relationship. However, every state has its own laws regarding marriage. 

TYPES OF CRUELTY:

Cruelty for the purpose of section 13 (1) (i-a) is to be taken as a behavior by one spouse towards the other, which causes reasonable apprehension in the mind of the latter that it is not safe for him or her to continue the matrimonial relationship with the other.

Now that we have discussed cruelty in length, we know one thing for sure that the courts keep on amending and widening the scope of cruelty with respect to women. So cruelty can be categorized into two types:

Physical cruelty

Hereby under physical cruelty, we are not referring to any violence that takes place anywhere outside but the matrimonial physical violence resulting in cruelty. Any physical violence, bodily injuries, the threat to life, limb and health apparently causing apprehension in the mind of the woman would constitute physical cruelty on the spouse. Establishing Physical cruelty is not much of a task because one of the most common reasons for divorce is physical violence. Assault in itself is a grave offence as stated under Section 351 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 320 of the Indian Penal Code defines grievous hurt. Hence, we can conclude that assault, grievous hurt and cruelty are somewhat interrelated to each other and do not pertain much of a difference. 

Mental cruelty as a ground for Divorce

Now it is not just about physical cruelty, mental cruelty has the same weightage compared with physical cruelty. Ascertaining mental cruelty is kind of more challenging than proving physical cruelty. Apart from the physical harm if any woman is inflicted with any kind of mental stress or has to compromise her mental peace for her spouse or have to constantly go through mental agony, then that amounts to mental cruelty. However, we will never come to know about the psychology of an individual and sometimes people are hypersensitive in nature so in that case if someone accuses someone of having exhibited cruelty then it cannot be entirely true. Therefore the person will not be entitled to ask for a divorce on grounds of cruelty. Mental strain can happen in various ways so there are no specific criteria which would amount to mental cruelty as a ground for Divorce, for example, if the spouse is forcing the wife to do something without the consent or willingness of the wife. Anything not expressed or hidden by the spouse which creates a sense of doubt also amounts to mental cruelty as a ground for Divorce. 

Mental cruelty is a state of mind and feeling with one of the spouses due to the behavior or behavioral pattern by the other. Unlike the case of physical cruelty, mental cruelty is difficult to establish by direct evidence. It is necessarily a matter of inference to be drawn from the facts and circumstances of the case.

Illustration- If a husband submits himself for an operation of sterilization without medical reasons and without the consent or knowledge of his wife and similarly, if the wife undergoes vasectomy or abortion without medical reason or without the consent or knowledge of her husband, such an act of the spouse may lead to mental cruelty;

An unrelenting course of abusive and humiliating treatment calculated to torture, discommode or render miserable the life of one spouse.

A feeling of anguish, disappointment and frustration in one spuse caused by the conduct of the other can only be appreciated on assessing the attending facts and circumstances in which the two partners of matrimonial life have been living. The inference has to be drawn from the attending facts and circumstances taken cumulatively. In case of mental cruelty it will not be a correct approach to take an instance of misbehaving in isolation and then pose the question whether such behavior is sufficient by itself to cause mental cruelty. The approach should be to take the cumulative effect of the facts and circumstances emerging from the evidence on record and then draw a fair inference whether the petitioner in the divorce petition has been subjected to mental cruelty due to conduct of the other.

In A . Jayachandra vs. Aneel Kaur (2005) 2 SCC 22, the court observed as under:

“the expression ‘cruelty’ has not been defined in the Hindu Marriage Act. Crulety can be physical or metal. Cruelty which is a ground for dissolution of marriage may be defined as willful and unjustifiable conduct of such character to cause danger to life, limb or health, bodily or mental, or as to give rise to a reasonable apprehension of such danger. The question of mental has to be considered in the light of the norms of marital ties of the particular society to which the parties belong, their social values, status, environment in which they live. Cruelty, as noted above, includes mental cruelty, which falls within purview of a matrimonial wrong. Cruelty need not be physical. If from the conduct of the spouse, same is established and/or an inference can be legitimately drawn that the treatment of the spouse is such that it causes an apprehension in the mind of the other spouse, about his or her mental welfare then this conduct of cruelty”.

HOW CRUELTY WAS ESTABLISHED AS A GROUND FOR DIVORCE:

Under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, as enacted originally, though cruelty was one of the grounds for obtaining judicial separation but it was not a ground for obtaining divorce. The word cruelty was not defined in the Act but in Section 10 of HMA which dealt with judicial separation the word cruelty was used in a restricting sense because it was provided that either party to a marriage may present petition praying for a decree for judicial separation on the ground that the other party has treated the petitioner with such cruelty as to cause a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that it will be harmful or injurious for the petitioner to live with the other party.

Section 13 of the Act deals with divorce. As enacted originally it did not have cruelty as one of the grounds for seeking divorce. The Legislature of Uttar Pradesh wished to include cruelty also as a ground for divorce and with that view in mind by its Act No.13 of 1962, Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act was amended to include cruelty as a ground for divorce. The amendment was to the effect that in sub-section (1) of Section 13, after clause (a), clause (i-a) was inserted as under:

 “(i-a)- has persistently or repeatedly treated the petitioner with such cruelty as to cause reasonable apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that it will be harmful or injurious for the petitioner to live with the other party, or”

This ground was almost similar to the ground of cruelty under hindu marriage act, Section 10(1)(b) for judicial separation but one distinction was made and that was that the words “persistently or repeatedly” were added. By this addition cruelty as a ground for divorce was made stricter than what it was for judicial separation.

As we have study the history of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, cruelty was never taken into consideration as a ground for divorce but was applied only in cases of judicial separation. Here the aggrieved party or the petitioner has to prove that the cruelty is so grave or so unbearable that it is getting difficult to carry forward with his or her spouse (the defender). But this was upheld by the Supreme Court in a landmark case of Narayan Ganesh Dastane Vs. Sucheta Narayan Dastane in 1975. 

This led to an amendment in the Act where cruelty as a ground for divorce was added into the Act with the inclusion of legal definition to the term cruelty under this Act in 1976. However, the Court also held that the courts should decide the case on grounds of cruelty only based upon the subject matter of the case. After the amendment in this act, there was not much distinction between the grounds of cruelty resulting in judicial separation and grounds of cruelty resulting in divorce except for two words that are added are “persistently or repeatedly”. By this addition, the establishment of cruelty as a ground for divorce was given much more importance than proving it as a ground for judicial separation. This ground was added under Section 10(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 and now “Cruelty” has a self-contained definition.

GENDER BIASNES IN CRUELTY AS A GROUND FOR DIVORCE:

India is largely a patriarchal society. The traditional dyad is the husband with high masculinity and the wife with high femininity. An important observation is that across generations, while women show less femininity, masculinity remains stable. Cross-culturally, the masculine stereotype remains stable, the female one changes; family-orientated traits which are seen as feminine in western culture are seen as gender-neutral and valued in India; both traditional and modern traits are valued in Indian women; and sex differences are mainly along the lines of greater autonomy for men.

Cruelty in matrimonial life may be of unfounded variety, which can be subtle or brutal. It may be words, gestures or by mere silence, violent or non-violent. It differs among the people of different scenario. 

CRUELTY AGAINST WIFE-

The general notion of cruelty is very subjective depending on time, place, persons and other factors also. The legal concept of cruelty, which is not defined by statute, is generally described as act or conduct of such a nature as to have caused danger to life, limb or health- physical or mental or as to make a reasonable apprehension of such danger.

A brief reading of judicial decisions across a range of different legal issues shows that violence is quite often a part of the background or context of a legal dispute but it is either ignored or treated as irrelevant. In India several legislations have been enacted from time to time to protect the position of women in regard of the same. All these legislations define the term cruelty differently depending on the underlying objective of the legislation. In 1983, domestic violence was recognized as a specific criminal offence by the introduction of section 498-A into the Indian Penal Code. This section deals with cruelty by a husband or his family towards a married woman. Four types of cruelty are dealt with by this law:

• conduct that is likely to drive a woman to suicide, 
• conduct which is likely to cause grave injury to the life, limb or health of the woman, 
• harassment with the purpose of forcing the woman or her relatives to give some property, or 
• harassment because the woman or her relatives is unable to yield to demands for more money or does not give some property. 

The punishment is imprisonment for upto three years and a fine. The complaint against cruelty need not be lodged by the person herself. Any relative may also make the complaint on her behalf.

There are other certain grounds on which cruelty can be proved against wife-

• Persistent denial of food,
• Insisting on perverse sexual conduct,
• Constantly locking a woman out of the house,
• Denying the woman access to children, thereby causing mental torture,
• Physical violence,
• Taunting, demoralising and putting down the woman with the intention of causing mental torture,
• Confining the woman at home and not allowing her normal social intercourse,
• Abusing children in their mother’s presence with the intention of causing her mental torture,
• Denying the paternity of the children with the intention of inflicing mental pain upon the mother, and
• Threatening divorce unless dowry is given.

Cruelty may be in the form of physical as well as mental by the act either of the husband or the wife. Though, it is the women who have always been subjected to be tortured and harassed by the husband and relatives. Commencement of creation women are been subject to cruelty, harassment, victims of dowry demands, dowry death etc. their lives were never easy and living in the shadow and protection of men was tormenting. Cruelty is the main ground to seek divorce as defined under ‘Sec 13(1) (i-a)’ of ‘The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955’ and party who is filing a case must prove that living between husband and wife became impossible. We have several laws like domestic violence act, section 304B IPC and many provisions made applicable for the protection of the women, which has got recognition from our constitutional law., in fact saying this will not be proper as cases of torture and harassment against the husband by the wife is increasing day by day.

It is evident from that fact that unlike almost all laws in INDIA the burden to prove innocence lies on the accused and this means as soon as the complaint is made by the aggrieved person/ wife, the result is that the husband and his family may be immediately arrested and will be considered as accused in the eyes of law. According to the ‘Section 498-A’ of the ‘IPC’ the wife and her parental family can charge any or all of the husband’s family of physical or mental cruelty but genuineness of the case has to be looked into by the court as this section is cognizable, non-compoundable and non-bailable in nature.

CRULETY AGAINST MEN-

 Though it is the duty of the court to decide the case based on facts and circumstances but what amounts to cruelty is an important aspect as misuse of Laws by the wife against husband in society is growing day by day and most apparently some Indian urban educated women have turned the tables and are using these laws as weapon to unleash personal vendetta on their husbands and innocent relatives and there are certain grounds on which cruelty against husband can be proved:-

• Misuse of Dowry Laws, Domestic Violence Act and ‘Sec: 498-A’ of IPC by wife against husband and in-laws of husband through lodging false complaints.

• Desertion by wife which means wife deliberately intending for separation and to bring cohabitation permanently to an end.

• Adultery by the wife means wife having sexual relationship with some other person during the lifetime of marriage and there must be strict law to punish wife who has committed adultery.

• Wife opting out for second marriage without applying for the divorce proceedings.

• Threatening to leave husband’s home and threat to commit suicide by the wife.

• Cruel behavior of wife where wife tearing the shirt of the husband, refusing to cook food properly or on time and breaking of the mangalsutra in the presence of husband’s relatives.

• Abusing and accusing husband by way of insulting in presence of in-laws and in some cases wife abusing husband in front of office staff members.

• Wife refusing to have sex with husband without any sufficient reasons which can be considered as a ground of cruelty and husband can file a divorce petition.

• Lowering reputation of the husband by using derogatory words in presence of family members and elders.

• Initiating criminal proceedings against husband and in-laws of husband with mala-fide intention by the wife.

Case Laws in Hindu marriage where a wife was held as ‘cruel’ to the husband and the Hindu divorce law was applied by the Supreme Court:

Mrs. Deepalakshmi Saehia Zingade v/s Sachi Rameshrao Zingade (AIR 2010 Bom 16)

In this case petitioner/wife filed a false case against her husband on the ground of ‘Husband Having Girl Friend’ which is proved as false in a court of law so it can be considered as cruelty against husband.

Kalpana v. Surendranath (AIR 1985 All 253)

According to this case it has been observed that where a wife who refuses to prepare tea for the husband’s friends was declared by the court as cruelty to husband.

Also, in Supreme Court’s verdict in the case of Narendra vs. K. Meena, wherein the Supreme Court has held that “if the wife forces and exerts pressure on the husband to live separate from his old aged parents or from the joint family without any reasonable excuse/ground, the same would amount to cruelty”.

Though the several laws and amendments introduced in the penal code are with the laudable object of eradicating the evil of Dowry and protecting women against violence and cruelty, such provisions cannot be allowed to be misused by the parents and the relatives of a psychotic wife who may have chosen to end her life for reason which may be many other than cruelty. The glaring reality cannot be ignored that the ugly trend of false implications in view to harass and blackmail an innocent spouse and his relatives, i.e. fast emerging. A strict law need to be passed by the parliament for saving the institution of marriage and to punish those women who are trying to misguide the court by filing false reports just to make the life of men miserable and ‘justice should not only be done but manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done’.

CONCLUSION:

The signal of the Supreme Court appears to be that while dealing with allegation of cruelty as a ground for divorce the courts should have in their mind that the petitioner has to prove that the respondent had behaved in such a way that the petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the other. In construing such behavior to be cruelty within the ambit of Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the courts will have to look into each and every case having regard to the facts and circumstances of that case.

Social status and educational level of the parties, the society they move in, the possibility or otherwise of the parties ever living together and all other relevant facts and circumstances will also have to be seen. In very exceptional cases divorce may be granted on mere accusations and allegations but regard must be had to the context in which they have been made. Absence of Intention should not make any difference in the case, if by ordinary sense in human affairs, the act complained of, could otherwise be regarded as cruelty.

In present era women are getting more benefits from law, many judges are prejudiced that women are vulnerable and they are victims of cruelty. The male on the other hand are helpless in many matters but the balance must be maintained between the spouses so that no body claims to be suffered.

Hence for these types of cases Judges are taking humanitarian approach generally. They did not use the law till certain limit, when they feel that the matter cannot be resolved then only they go for the decree of divorce, e.g. in two different cases where the allegations were same on the husband that he was making physical harm and mental torture to the wife, they found that on the part of female her maternal family members are involved in the matter and they are making allegations on behalf of the lady but she is not, hence judges have gone for the meeting with both the parties and found that the allegations those were put by them on husband are not true and those were put in the case on advice of the family members and lawyers of the parties, then judges resolved the cases as the settlement and gone for decree of divorce with the consent of women that they are taking back the allegations on their husband and those were made under pressure.

So we can see in the case of Kohli also there was the prestige of the man that is on gamble because if the criminal cases were proved then he will be behind the bars and what could be the social life of them after that. Hence for the cases of this type we must see for both faces of coin and then only go for any decision, so nobody will claim to be misjudged.

At last we can conclude that anybody can reach the court for the divorce on basis of cruelty, but, the case will be decided by the mere facts of that case, court can extend or summarize the meaning of cruelty according to their own interpretation but within the boundary of the law and without being prejudiced.

 

You may contact me for consultation or advice by visiting Contact Us and Call us