ARVIND SHARMA Vs. KIRAN SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 against the judgment and decree dated 29-6-2010 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur, in Civil Suit No. 400-A/2010, whereby the application filed by the appellant/plaintiff under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for dissolution of marriage on the ground of desertion and cruelty by a decree of divorce has been rejected. Facts not in dispute are that marriage between the parties was solemnised on 3-12-1988 at as per Hindu rites and ceremonies and out of their wedlock two issues, i.e., one daughter named Ku. Shrutika Sharma and one son named Shantanu Sharma, who were 18 and 15 years of age at the time of filing of application, were born. An application was filed by the respondent/wife against the appellant/husband for grant of maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., before the Family Court. The respondent/wife had lodged complaints with the Governor, Chief Minister and at the concerned police station leveling charges against the appellant/ husband regarding commission of physical and mental cruelty by him against her.

(2.) Case of the appellant/plaintiff, as projected in the application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, are that marriage between the parties was solemnised on 3-12-1988 and out of their wedlock, daughter Ku. Shrutika Sharma and son Shantanu Sharma were born. Both the appellant and the respondent were discharging their marital obligations towards each other. However, all of a sudden, the respondent/wife started mentally, physically and economically torturing the appellant/husband. Whenever the appellant used to return home, the respondent would not open the door of the house and used to abuse him. She used to deprive him of his marital rights and whenever he used to express his desire to have sexual intercourse, she used to refuse to establish physical relations with him and used to behave in a cruel and derogatory manner. The respondent/wife was always negligent and indifferent towards her in-laws and used to say that she and the appellant cannot reside together under the same roof. The respondent in front of her mother-in-law had broken the mangalsutra and used to tarnish the social and family image of the appellant's family. The respondent had assaulted the appellant on 9-2-2008 and made her intentions clear that she cannot live with him as husband and wife under the same roof. The respondent with intent to kill the appellant and thereafter, to obtain compassionate appointment, had been administering medicines to the appellant against his wishes, which were injurious to his health and life. However, without any rhyme or reason, she filed an application for grant of maintenance before the Family Court under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., despite the fact that the appellant had never refused or neglected to maintain her (respondent) and his children. The appellant is a Class I Officer and with intent to lower down and blemish his image, that the respondent/wife leveling baseless allegations, had filed complaints before the Governor, Chief Minister and at the police station against him. Since 9-2-2008, the respondent/wife, without any rhyme or reason, is living separately and has deserted the company of the appellant. On the basis of above mentioned conduct of the respondent/wife, the appellant/husband filed an application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce on the ground of desertion and cruelty.

(3.) The respondent/wife has filed written statement, wherein she has denied the allegations levelled against her by the appellant in his application for divorce. She has averred that immediately after solemnisation of marriage on 3-12-1988, the appellant/husband had been treating her with cruelty. He used to level false charges against her with regard to her moral character and of practicing witchcraft. She has averred that on 9-2-2008, the appellant had beaten her and after that she had left the house and is residing separately. She has also averred that complaints made to the Governor, Chief Minister and before the Station House Officer of the police station, were not baseless, but were based on true facts. As per respondent, she was being tortured by the appellant since last 19 years and she is apprehending danger to her life and limb, if she resides with the appellant and therefore, now she does not want to live with the appellant.