On July 19, the Patna High Court refused to interfere with the lower court’s decision to dismiss a matrimonial case seeking a divorce. The husband had moved the family court seeking dissolution of marriage on grounds of cruelty; however, the court dismissed the husband’s case after he failed to prove the allegations of cruelty against the wife.
The Patna High Court’s Division Bench, comprising Justices PB Bajanthri and Jitendra Kumar, heard the case. The court noted that while the husband cited refusal to cohabit to substantiate his allegations of cruelty against the wife, he did take steps for restitution of conjugal rights. Thus, the court held that the husband’s allegations regarding refusal to cohabit did not hold ground.
The court further observed that after the husband found out that the wife has a cyst in her uterus, and thus, is unable to bear a child, he wanted to divorce her and get remarried to another woman so he could have a child. The court said, “Such motive of the appellant-husband is clearly apparent from the pleading and evidence.”
“Here, it is relevant to mention that developing any disease during the continuation of marriage is not within the control of any spouse. In such a situation, the other spouse has a marital duty to co-operate and bear with it and help the other spouse,” the court said.
“It is also worth mentioning that inability to bear a child is neither impotence nor any ground for dissolving the marriage. Such possibility of inability to bear a child may be part of marital life of anybody and parties to a marriage may resort to other means for having a child, such as, adoption. Divorce is not provided as per the Hindu Marriage Act in such circumstances,” the court added while dismissing the husband’s appeal.
Husband’s Allegations Against Wife’s Character
The husband had made multiple character allegations against the wife in his pleadings. The husband alleged that the wife went back to her parental home after living at the matrimonial home for about 1-2 months. Furthermore, the husband claimed that the wife’s conduct was improper to his parents and other family members while living at the matrimonial home.
The husband further alleged that the wife “does not have mental balance” and has refused to cohabit and consummate the marriage, alleging that the wife has not married for “making a family but to break her virginity.”
The husband further alleged while living at her matrimonial home, some people from the wife’s village used to meet her in a closed room despite objections from the husband’s family members. The husband claimed that the wife used to abuse the husband’s family members when they used to ask her about the meeting, saying they have no business knowing about the said meeting.
The husband further submitted that he visited the wife’s parental home several times to get her back to the matrimonial home; however, she refused to join him at the matrimonial home. The husband alleged while living at her paternal home, the wife informed him about her ill health and asked for money for treatment.
The husband submits that he took the wife to the doctor where she got an ultrasonic test of her uterus done on July 29, 2016. The husband submits that as per the medical report, the wife had a cyst in her uterus and was thus unable to produce eggs for reproduction. The husband averred that being a young man, he needs cohabitation and desires to become a father. He further averred that the wife is neither willing to cohabit, nor she could become a mother.
“It is further alleged that she always used to demand money and on refusal she used to threat to commit suicide and implicate the whole family of the appellant in dowry case to send them to jail. Hence, the appellant and his family members do not feel safe to keep her at matrimonial home,” the court noted from the husband’s pleadings.
