Supreme Law News

Is speaking against father amounts to cruelty ?

The court noted this when it granted a man's divorce from his wife, who had brought numerous criminal charges against him and his family members and kept him from meeting their little daughter.

A mother coaching her child against her own father is a severe problem and amounts to cruelty to the guy, according to a recent ruling by the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

The remark was made by a division bench consisting of Justices Sheel Nagu and Vinay Saraf when they were divorcing a man whose wife had brought numerous criminal charges against him and his family members and had also kept him from seeing their little daughter.

Due to the ongoing legal proceedings, the bench declined to comment on the wife's criminal complaints; however, it did state that the "wife crossed all barriers in levelling allegations against husband and his family members".

According to the court's findings based on the record, the husband was denied the opportunity to meet his newborn daughter in 2014 and was forced to initiate a civil suit to obtain custody of the minor kid.

The wife refused to comply with the Family Court's directive to let her husband see the child, the Court stated.

In light of this, the Court cited previous findings about parental alienation and the mental cruelty of trying to influence a kid against a parent by the Delhi High Court and Kerala High Court.

"Given the foregoing rulings from the Delhi and Kerala High Courts, as well as the specifics of this case, it is clear to say that the wife in this instance has likewise attempted to shield her little daughter from her husband and has encouraged her to speak out against her own father. The bench stated, "This is a serious matter and undoubtedly caused mental cruelty to husband."

In the current instance, the woman allegedly prevented the husband from seeing their daughter, so he filed a custody petition in the Jabalpur family court, requesting custody of his young child. The court granted his petition on May 18, 2017.

In addition, the woman was regularly ordered by the court to bring their daughter so that the father may meet her during the divorce procedures. The wife's unwillingness to help arrange contacts between the daughter and her father was seen by the family court in 2020.

The appellant-husband first petitioned the district court for a divorce on grounds of mental cruelty and desertion. The matter was then sent by the Supreme Court to the Principal Judge's office at the Family Court in Jabalpur. October 13, 2020, saw the dismissal of the petition.

This resulted in the current High Court appeal.

The High Court observed that the wife's actions had subjected her husband to mental abuse.

A few months into her marriage, she had moved out of the matrimonial house.

The Court noted that although the husband and his family had anticipated her return, she never did, and they have not lived together ever since.

It further stated that they had filed numerous lawsuits against one another and that all attempts at conciliation between them had failed.

"...the wife's repeated complaints and formal complaints have caused the marriage to irreversibly fail. Divorce will end the suffering and suffering on both parties... There is very little likelihood that respondent wife and appellant husband would have a happy life together, even if this court grants the appellant husband a divorce judgment. This is because respondent wife's actions have caused a great deal of hatred and even cruelty," the statement stated.

Because of this, it granted the husband's appeal and the divorce.

While the proceedings are still continuing, the Court declined to comment on the merits of the complaints that the husband and wife had brought against one another.

"So far as lodging of FIRs and filing of various criminal cases are concerned, all cases are still pending and any comment on merits of pending cases may prejudice interest of parties and create obstacle in just disposal of cases by competent courts, therefore this court refrains from giving any finding touching the merits of pending criminal cases," it stated.

JUDGEMENT

Your free access to Supreme Law News has expired

Supreme Law News Premium

Why should you subscribe?

* Enjoy our website without interruptions from advertisements

* Receive daily newsletters

* Receive real-time Telegram/Whatsapp news updates

* Download original judgments / orders / notifications / circulars, etc

* Enjoy exclusive entry fees to the Simplified series. (Webinars, seminars, masterclasses, etc.)

( special offer)

Subscribe Now

For further details contact:

Dr. Ajay Kummar Pandey

( LLM, MBA, (UK), PhD, AIMA, AFAI, PHD Chamber, ICTC, PCI, FCC, DFC, PPL, MNP, BNI, ICJ (UK), WP, (UK), MLE, Harvard Square, London, CT, Blair Singer Institute, (USA), Dip. in International Crime, Leiden University, the Netherlands )

Advocate & Consultant Supreme Court of India, High Courts & Tribunals.