KIRANDEEP Vs. SARAVJIT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant appeal, the appellant-husband has challenged the judgment and decree dated 22.10.2014 passed by the Additional District Judge, Panchkula, whereby the petition filed by the respondent-wife under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short "the Act") for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty, was allowed.

(2.) A few facts necessary for adjudication of the present appeal as narrated therein may be noticed. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 23.4.2012 at Shiv Mandir, Village Majri, District Panchkula, as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. It was a love marriage against the wishes of the parents of the respondent. After the marriage, the parties resided together and cohabited as husband and wife at village Surajpur. However, no child was born from the said wedlock. It was averred in the petition that the appellant misrepresented the respondent regarding his financial status and instigated her to go against the wishes of her parents. She was compelled to elope with him for the purpose of marriage and further provoked her to take away jewellery and cash from her house. The appellant in collusion with his parents filed a frivolous petition for protection before the Sessions Judge, Panchkula and her father was forced to make a statement not to interfere in the married life of the parties. She stayed with the appellant in the matrimonial home for about 3/4 days after obtaining the protection order but thereafter the behaviour of the appellant and his parents changed. Before the marriage, the appellant projected himself to be vegetarian and afterwards started drinking and under the influence of liquor, he used to beat her. She was being harassed and tortured by the family members of the appellant for not bringing any dowry. The appellant used to assault her and on a number of occasions tried to commit carnal intercourse against the call of the nature. She requested the appellant and his parents to leave her but they threatened her to face dire consequences. However, she ran away from the matrimonial home on 25.8.2012 and took shelter in her parental home. The matter was reported to the police who got her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure from the court of area Magistrate. She filed a complaint against the appellant and his parents regarding threats given to her and as a counter blast, the appellant filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act which is pending before the Court at Kalka. Thus, the appellant treated the respondent with cruelty. Accordingly, the respondent filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce. The said petition was resisted by the appellant by filing a written statement. Besides raising various preliminary objections, it was pleaded that after the marriage the parties were forced to seek protection order from the court as they were afraid from the parents of the respondent. It was further pleaded that on 25.8.2012, the respondent was forcibly taken away by her parents from Amravati Hospital, where she had gone along with the appellant for medical check up. She was carrying four month fetus. The respondent had been in the illegal custody of her parents since 25.8.2012. According to the appellant, the parents of the respondent being rich and influential persons had got recorded her statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The other averments made in the petition were denied and a prayer for dismissal of the same was made. From the pleadings of the parties, the court below framed the following issues:-

(3.) In support of his case, the appellant examined himself as RW1 besides tendering into evidence Mark R1-application dated 3.9.2012 regarding stoppage of abortion of the respondent and Mark R2-application dated 10.12.2012 given by the appellant to the DCP, Panchkula. The respondent besides examining herself as PW1, examined her cousin Paramjit Kaur as PW2, her father Chanan Singh as PW3 and Dr. Parampreet Kaur as PW4 in support of her case. She also tendered in evidence various documents Ex.P1 to Ex.P10 and Marks A and B.