Jharkhand HC sends strong message on marriage, rejects four divorce appeals in one day
SUMAN K SHRIVASTAVA Ranchi, July 24: In a remarkable series of four matrimonial judgments delivered on July 23, the Jharkhand High Court…
SUMAN K SHRIVASTAVA
Ranchi, July 24: In a remarkable series of four matrimonial judgments delivered on July 23, the Jharkhand High Court underscored a consistent legal principle: marriages cannot be dissolved merely because spouses have drifted apart, lived separately for years or levelled allegations against each other without proof.
A Division Bench of Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava dismissed four separate appeals filed by husbands challenging Family Court orders refusing divorce. Though the facts of each case varied widely—from newlyweds who separated within days to a couple whose legal battle stretched over two decades—the Bench reached the same conclusion: courts cannot break a family unless the statutory grounds for divorce are established through reliable evidence.
The four appeals reflected very different marriages but a common legal question—whether allegations of cruelty, adultery or desertion had been proved.
Case 1: A 39-year-old marriage overshadowed by suspicion
Perhaps the most poignant case involved a 67-year-old Jamshedpur man and his 52-year-old wife, who married in 1987 but had been living apart since 2002.
For nearly 24 years, the dispute travelled through the Family Court and the High Court. The husband accused his wife of cruelty and adultery, alleging denial of conjugal relations and an extramarital relationship.
The High Court found that none of the allegations was supported by convincing evidence. The Bench noted that the husband admitted during cross-examination that he had never caught his wife in any compromising situation, had never lodged complaints regarding the alleged affair or threats, and had produced no documentary evidence.
The court observed that mere suspicion cannot replace proof and reiterated that making unsubstantiated allegations of adultery against a spouse itself constitutes mental cruelty.
Case 2: Marriage lasted days, litigation lasted years
In another appeal, a 55-year-old Ranchi resident challenged the dismissal of his divorce petition against his 37-year-old wife, whom he married in May 2019.
He claimed the marriage was never consummated, alleged abusive behaviour and argued that they had been living separately since June 2019.
The wife maintained that the marriage had been consummated and alleged that her husband himself had left her at her maternal uncle’s house before initiating legal proceedings within months of the wedding.
The High Court found that despite years of separation, the husband failed to establish cruelty through credible evidence. It held that a failed marriage or prolonged separation, by itself, is not a legal ground for divorce.
Case 3: Two-month marriage and allegations of desertion
The third case involved a 34-year-old Dhanbad man who sought divorce from his 25-year-old wife, alleging she quarrelled with his family, threatened to implicate them in criminal cases and deserted him within two months of marriage.
The wife countered that she had been forced out after objecting to her husband’s alleged relationship with another woman and after facing harassment at her matrimonial home.
The High Court held that the husband had failed to prove either cruelty or desertion. The Bench noted that vague allegations unsupported by specific incidents, independent witnesses or documentary evidence could not justify dissolution of marriage. It also observed that the statutory requirement for proving desertion had not been met.
Case 4: Allegations failed the legal test
The fourth appeal, also decided on July 23, similarly involved a husband seeking divorce on allegations of cruelty. After examining the pleadings and evidence, the High Court found that the accusations lacked sufficient legal proof and upheld the Family Court’s refusal to dissolve the marriage.
Like the other three cases, the Bench emphasised that matrimonial disputes must be decided on evidence rather than emotions, assumptions or strained relationships.
Common thread running through all four judgments
Across all four decisions, the High Court relied on settled Supreme Court precedents to reiterate that:
- Cruelty must be grave, specific and supported by credible evidence.
- Adultery cannot be inferred from suspicion or conjecture.
- Desertion requires proof of intentional abandonment without reasonable cause.
- Long separation or an irretrievably strained relationship is not, by itself, a statutory ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The Bench repeatedly stressed that courts cannot dissolve marriages merely because spouses no longer wish to live together or because trust has broken down.
A message beyond the four cases
The four judgments, delivered on the same day, collectively reaffirm the judiciary’s cautious approach to matrimonial disputes. While acknowledging that the relationships had clearly deteriorated—some within weeks of marriage and another after nearly four decades—the High Court held that the breakdown of a relationship is not enough unless it satisfies the legal grounds prescribed by law.
In effect, the Bench reinforced a simple but significant principle: family ties cannot be legally severed on flimsy, vague or unsubstantiated allegations. However strained a marriage may become, divorce must rest on proven facts—not suspicion, bitterness or prolonged separation alone.
