PREETI KUMARI Vs. NEELKANTH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Wife aggrieved by the dismissal of her petition for divorce vide impugned judgment and decree dated August 4, 2014 passed by Additional District Judge, Bhatinda, has preferred this appeal.

(2.) The appellant has pleaded in her petition that she was married to the respondent on January 21, 2007. One male child Adarsh was born out of the wedlock who is living with the appellant. A sum of Rs.4 lacs was spent on her marriage and sufficient dowry had been given to the respondent and his family members which included gold ornaments weighing 10 tolas and other household articles. The appellant was treated with cruelty on account of barbarous and abhorrent obscene obnoxious acts of the respondent. It was averred that at the time of marriage it was disclosed that the respondent was posted as Engineer in Dew Soft Company earning a sum of Rs.30000/- p.m. and will accommodate the appellant for higher studies by incurring necessary expenses but after marriage it transpired that he was a jobless person not doing any work and was not working as Engineer in the above said Company. The appellant continued with her studies in Bhatinda and completed her graduation and PGDCA at Bathinda where a all the expenses had to be borne by her parents. Even the expenses of the delivery of the child were borne by the parents of the appellant. The appellant was taunted by the respondent and his family members for not having brought sufficient dowry as per their expectations. They connived with each other and started humiliating her. The appellant was subject to beating on account of her inability to meet the demand of the respondent and her family members. It has also been alleged in the petition that the respondent was a drunken man habitual of taking liquor. He would insist on the appellant to take liquor with him and on her refusal he would give severe beatings to her.

(3.) It is averred in the petition that the respondent committed forcible sexual acts against her wishes and moods even during the painful period of menses. The respondent after taking liquor committed sodomy forcibly on account of which painful hue and cry was never cared for and that he continued with his illegal sexual behaviour. Despite all this, the respondent remained malcontent and for fulfilling his lust of unnatural sex and abhorrent respondent forced oral sex on the appellant. When prevented from the painful acts he would give beatings to the appellant physically and mentally. He persistently committed sodomy and despite the resistance of the appellant, she was forced to continue with the unnatural behaviour of the respondent.