KUSUM Vs. RAJESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-wife challenges judgment and decree dated 01.5.2012, passed by the Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court), Karnal, dismissing her petition for grant of a decree of divorce.

(2.) Counsel for the appellant submits that the evidence on record, particularly depositions, by the appellant, her father Ajmer Singh, (PW2) and her uncle Shamsher Singh (PW-3) prove that the appellant was treated with such a degree of cruelty as is sufficient to dissolve the marriage. The trial court has rejected the pleadings and evidence though they prove repeated harassment, beatings, demands of dowry and refusal to allow the appellant into the matrimonial home. The trial court has held that as there is no evidence that the respondent is a habitual drunkard or that he was booked under the Punjab Excise Act, 1914, nor has any medico-legal report been produced to prove the allegation that the respondent beat the appellant under the influence of liquor. A perusal of the evidence on record reveals that the appellant has deposed in clear and consistent terms that the respondent would beat the appellant while under the influence of liquor. The respondent has not been able to rebut these allegations. The mere fact that there is no medico legal report or that the respondent was not booked under the Excise Act etc. does mean that the appellant and her witnesses have deposed falsely. The demand for dowry and its payment have been proved by the clear and cogent depositions by the appellant, her father and her uncle but has been negated on the ground that the respondent owns two shops, 1½ acres of land and a big house and, therefore, would not demand dowry. A demand of dowry has nothing to do with a person owning property. The appellant's allegation that she was treated with cruelty by the respondent and his family members after the birth of a female child, has been overlooked. The plea of desertion has been negated by holding that it has not been proved that the respondent created such a situation that would compel the appellant to leave the matrimonial home.

(3.) Counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submits that the trial court has, after appraisal of the pleadings and the evidence, recorded clear and cogent findings, negating the pleas of cruelty and desertion. Apart from the oral statements made by the appellant and her witnesses there is no evidence of any beating, proved whether by oral or medical evidence. The allegations of consuming liquor and then beating the appellant, have been found to be false. The allegation of demand of dowry or maltreatment, after the birth of a minor child, remains unsubstantiated for want of any corroborative evidence. Counsel for the respondent further submits that the respondent has been acquitted of charges under Sections 406 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, thereby proving that allegations of demand of dowry, harassment etc. are false. As it is the appellant who has levelled false allegations which she is unable to prove, she cannot take advantage of her own wrong.