M Vs. M

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this Family Court Appeal, the Appellant husband has taken an exception to the judgment and decree dated 5th April 2006 passed by the learned Judge of the Family Court, Pune. We have blocked the names of the parties for the benefit of the parties considering the rival allegations.

(2.) The Appellant husband filed a Petition for seeking a decree of divorce under Clause (ia) of Subsection (1) of Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The marriage was solemnized on 3rd July 1998. The divorce was sought on the ground of cruelty. The ground of cruelty is based on the allegation that a false prosecution was initiated at the instance of the Respondent against the Appellant and his family members for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. In the Petition for divorce, the Appellant has set out various details and has alleged that the manner in which the prosecution was conducted caused enormous mental cruelty to him and to his family members. It is pointed out that the prosecution resulted into the acquittal. The Respondent wife denied the allegations by filing a written statement. The Appellant examined himself. The Respondent examined herself. The Appellant examined two other witnesses. The Respondent also examined one witness. The learned Judge of the Family Court held that the Appellant failed to substantiate the allegations of cruelty.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the Appellant has taken us through the pleadings and the notes of evidence. He pointed out the consistent conduct of the Respondent as reflected from the evidence on record. He also invited our attention to the judgment and order of the Criminal Court by which the Appellant and his family members were acquitted in a case where allegations against the Appellant and his family members were of the commission of the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code ( for short "IPC"). He submitted that filing of such a false case against the Appellant and his family members and the manner in which the case was conducted caused mental cruelty to the husband. He relied upon a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Nitin Ramesh Dhiwar v. Sou. Roopali Nitin Dhiwar, 2012 7 AllMR 315. He also relied upon an unreported decision of this Court in the case of Nagesh Dhanapp Chikanti v. Sau. Manisha Nagesh Chilkanti, FCA No.158 of 2008 decided on 6th May 2010. He relied upon a decision of the Apex Court in the case of V. Bhagat Vs. Mrs. D. Bhagat, 1994 AIR(SC) 710. He pointed out that in the written statement, the wife has alleged that due to the mental and physical illtreatment of the Appellant, she suffered from arthritis. He also pointed out that in the written statement, the wife has alleged that due to the ill treatment given to her by the Appellant and his family members, her father suffered a shock and due to shock, he expired on 22nd March 2003. The learned counsel urged that these unsubstantiated allegations of serious nature caused mental cruelty to the Appellant husband.