PUSHPA KUMARI Vs. ARJUN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal has been filed by the wife against the decree for judicial separation passed in favour of the husband.

(2.) THE parties were married at Bhiwani on 16th January, 1974. On 29th May, 1976, the respondent filed a petition in the court of District Judge, Udaipur under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter ref'rred to as 'the Act') for a decree for judicial separation. In the said petition, it was alleged that soon after the marriage, the appellant came to live with the respondent at his parental house in Kherwada and stayed for about 4 years and that from very first day, she started behaving in a cruel and improper manner with the respondent and that she also misbehaved with the parents of the respondent. The appellant came back to Kherwada in August, 1974 and this time she made a false and malicious accusation against the respondent that he was having illicit relations with the wife of his elder brother. She also used to abuse the parents of the respondent and had threatened to assault the mother of the respondent. In September, 1974, the appellant was taken away by her father. Thereafter the father of the appellant left her at Kherwada on 1st July, 1975 and took her away on 10th September, 1975 and while taking away the appellant with him, the father of the appellant also took away her clothes and ornaments as per the list which was prepared in the presence of attesting witnesses belonging to the village. During this time also, the behaviour of the appellant towards the respondent continued to be cruel and she repeatedly used to give the threat that she would burn herself and would falsely implicate the members of the respondent's family and get them sent to jail. In the petition aforesaid, the respondent also alleged that on 5th September, 1975, the father of the respondent lodged a complete false and baseless report with the Officer -in charge P.S. Kherwada to the effect that the respondent and the members of his family had kept the appellant confined in a godown and were not giving her food and were also mal -treating her and that copies of the said report were sent to the Superintendent of Police, Udaipur, Superintendent Police, Dungarpur, Collector, Dungarpur and the Inspector General of Police, Rajasthan and that after investigation of the case, the Police found that the allegations contained in the said report were false. In the said petition, it was further alleged that the father of the appellant also submitted a complaint before Shri Gulab Singh Shaktawat, Home Minister, Rajasthan who forwarded it for enquiry to Shri Bhupal Singh, Deputy Superintendent, Rishabhdeo and the said Shri Bhupal Singh visited the house of the respondent on 13th September, 1975 and found the aforesaid complaint to be false. In the said petition, the respondent also alleged that the father of the appellant submitted a petition dated 24th May, 1975 or 25th May, 1975 before the Superintendent of Police, Udaipur against the respondent, his parents and both his elder brothers in respect of offences under Sections 406 and 420 I.P.C. with a view to get the respondent and the members of his family wrested and to put undue pressure on them. In the petition aforesaid, the respondent also alleged that the appellant had sent a letter to the Editor of 'Kherwada Samachar', a weekly news paper published from Kherwada, which was published in 8th October, 1975 issue of the said paper and that false facts were mentioned in that letter. In the petition aforesaid the respondent stated that in view of the aforesaid activities of the appellant, the reputation of the respondent and the members of his family has been greatly damaged both in Kherwada and in Dungarpur and that the further living of the respondent with the appellant would be injurious to him and that, therefore, the respondent was unable to live with the appellant and was entitled to a decree for judicial separation.

(3.) ON the basis of the aforesaid pleadings, the District Judge framed two issues. Issue no 1 was as to whether the behaviour of the appellant towards the respondent was cruel and for that reason, the respondent cannot live with her. Issue no. 2 was as to the relief which may be granted.