Case filed by wife turns out to be false, court declares it amounts to cruelty

Sabareesh Pillay | School of Law, University of Mumbai Thane Sub-Campus | 27th August 2020

Suchitra Kumar Singha Roy Vs Smt. Arpita Singha Roy

FACTS:

In this case the respondent-wife was married to the petitioner-husband according to Hindu traditions and rights on 4^thFebruary 2002. The start of the marriage was merry but after 2 years the wife started to misbehave and abuse with her husband and in-laws. It was also alleged by the husband that she did not do any housework and would bring up a fight when asked to do so. After some months the in-laws started to live in another house and the husband and wife that is, the petitioner and respondent stayed in the house. The wife was an active member of the Mahila Samity and used to make bogus claims of physical assault and mental torture by her husband. The Petitioner-Husband also said that the respondent- wife made no time for him and their son and that he was forced to file a decree for judicial separation when his wife assaulted him with a sickle and on one instance he and his parents were assaulted at the hands of the wife and he and his mother were kept locked for more than 5 hours.

ISSUE:

Under article 498A, 406 and 313 of the Indian Penal Code.

PETITIONER CONTENTION:

The petitioner contended that physical assault and mental torture by the respondent- his wife was becoming a common occurrence. In one instance he mentioned that When he got back home after having a bath in a nearby pond, his wife did not allow him to come into the room and kept him waiting with wet wearing apparels for at least 2 hours and in spite of being requested on numerous times, the wife did not open the door and hence the husband was forced to take shelter in his parent’s house and when later he went back to his house he was abused by his wife.

RESPONDENT CONTENTION:

The respondent-Wife contended that it was in-fact her husband and his family members who mentally tortured her and also insulted her parents based on false allegations, the respondent also claimed that her in-laws asked for dowry and jewellery from her parents and it was not possible for them to fulfil their demands as they were not financially well-off. The respondent further alleged that all the allegations made against her by her husband and in-laws are false and bogus and that there is no evidence against her.

JUDGEMENT:

The two judge bench of Justice Sampati Chatterjee and Justice Manojit Mandal observed that from the evidence produced in the court it clearly indicates that the respondent- wife used to fights and quarrel regularly with her in-laws and was very cruel and misbehaved with her husband, also keeping in mind that there was an attempt to solve this problem by the local panchayat but even after the intervention of the panchayat she had mentioned that she would mend her ways but she there was no change in her mind and she continued to misbehave with her husband and his family. The court gave the judgement that there was evidence of malice on the part of the respondent-wife and also the divorce decree is accepted by the court, thus the petitioner and respondent are no longer husband and wife.