Allahabad High Court Clarifies Standards for Proving Cruelty in Divorce Cases

Last Updated on October 1, 2024 by Srijan Raj

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that courts can only uphold allegations of cruelty based on proven facts and evidence. The court stated that courts are not required to imagine ideal family or relations to determine the infliction of cruelty. Unless proven facts are such that the aggrieved parties are entitled to construe the act of cruelty committed on them, the court may not impose their own morality or opinion as to the conduct offered by the parties in the situation in which they existed.

The case involved a couple who got married in 2011 and filed for divorce in 2013 on grounds of cruelty by the appellant-wife. The appellant-wife accused the respondent of rude and quarrelsome behavior, including assaulting her mother-in-law in absence of other family members. The Principal Judge, Baghpat, dissolved the marriage on grounds of cruelty based on the evidence led by the parties. The appellant challenged the order of the Family Court dissolving the marriage without providing any alimony.

The appellant argued that no evidence regarding the alleged assault was led by the respondent, even in the criminal trial which led to the acquittal of all accused. The respondent argued that failure to pass the strict test of proof in criminal trial will not affect the allegations of cruelty in divorce proceedings. The court also noted that the appellant had lodged multiple criminal cases against the respondent after the institution of the divorce proceedings, stating that the parties had been living separately for 11 years.

The court observed that the criminal cases for demand of dowry were only registered after the institution of divorce proceedings, and that the cruelty alleged was only based on alleged assault on the respondent’s mother. The court held that the court could only determine cruelty based on the evidence led before them, and that the Family Court had committed a procedural error in relying on evidence not pleaded in the plaint. The court set aside the order passed by the Family Court as cruelty for dissolving the marriage between the parties was not established.