SMITA TRIPATHI Vs. VIKRAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an unusual case where a marriage has gone sour. The appellant and the opposite party fell in love, ran away from their parental home and got married secretly in an Arya Samaj Mandir on 2nd December, 2005. Subsequently, the marriage was registered on 1st March, 2006. The couple stayed together as husband and wife till 24th March, 2006. It is alleged that an incident occurred on 24th March, 2006, which changed the destiny of the couple. It is alleged that during Holi festival, the appellant went to her parents place and, at that stage, the husband and his family members made a demand of Rs.3 lacs as dowry, which the appellant and her family members refused. It is alleged that when the appellant came back to her husband's place she was beaten up and was made to sign an application, which was addressed to Police Station Nazibabad and, thereafter, was given a poison. She was subsequently taken to the hospital by her father-in-law and brother-in-law indicating it as a case of attempt to commit suicide and, after getting the appellant admitted, left the hospital. The appellant alleged that she somehow intimated her parents, who took her to Hamirpur on 26th March, 2006 where the husband and his family members threatened them. The appellant also asserted that during her stay with her husband, she was physically and mentally tortured and at times was beaten up. It was contended that a first information report dated 28th March, 2015 was lodged against the opposite party and her family members under Section 498A, 307 I.P.C. and other allied sections as well as under Section 3/4 of The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. On these facts, a suit for divorce on the ground of cruelty was filed by the appellant.

(2.) The opposite party filed the written statement denying the allegations contending that after getting married they lived separately and did not live with his parents. The allegation of demand of dowry was denied and the incident dated 24th March, 2006 was also denied in the manner in which the appellant had alleged. According to the opposite party, the appellant went to her parents place during Holi festival where she was pressurized not to go back to her husband's place and when pressure was exerted, she consumed poison. The opposite party contended that when he was informed, he rushed and took the appellant to the hospital and got her admitted and took steps for her treatment but after two days the parents of the appellant took her away from the hospital while the opposite party had gone out to purchase medicines. In this regard, the opposite party sent a telegram to the S.S.P. It was also stated that during the course of mediation, the appellant's parents, in connivance with the police, forced the opposite party to consume poison at the police station, as a result of which, he was hospitalised and that the police lodged a first information report against him. It was also contended that the opposite party made efforts to bring the appellant back to his house and when all efforts failed, he filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. As a counterblast, the appellant filed the suit for divorce under Section 13 of the Act.

(3.) The trial court after sifting through the evidence allowed the application for restitution of conjugal rights and directed the appellant to live with her husband and perform her marital obligations. By another order, the trial court dismissed the suit for divorce. The appellant, being aggrieved by the aforesaid two orders, has filed two separate appeals, which have been clubbed together and are being decided.