SIMON LAKRA Vs. MTSUGAN BAKHLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference made by the Judicial Commissioner of Chota Nagpur for a decree absolute in a petition for divorce for which a decree was granted by him.

(2.) The petitioner Simon Lakra is a member of the Lutheran community, at Uraon of the district of Ranchi and he was married to the respondent in the year 1924. He lived with his wife for a period of about seven months; they had no children. The wife then left him and went off to live with her sister-in-law at a distant village; from the sister-in-law's place she went to live with a man in the Jaspur estate. Evidence has been called consisting of the evidence of the petitioner himself who proves the marriage and proves that he lived with his wife for this period of seven months and had no children; that she left him and went away to her sister-in-law, and that she is now living with the co-respondent. That evidence is corroborated by that of a witness who is apparently a neighbour of the petitioner, and both of the witnesses say that they had been to the house of the co-respondent where they found the respondent living, and that she had with her a child who was under five years of age and therefore must have been born from cohabitation after the time when she left the petitioner's household.

(3.) We think it necessary to make some observations with regard to the evidence which is often considered satisfactory by the District Courts to prove the adultery alleged. Petitions of this sort are not of the character of an ordinary undefended civil suit. The adultery requires direct proof either by that of eyewitnesses or irresistible inference, and direct proof is required of the identity of persons charged with adultery. In the majority of cases the conclusion reached is an inference from evidence which is not sufficient in law to justify the inference.