The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a husband's appeal seeking divorce on grounds of cruelty and alleged mental disorder, holding that unsubstantiated allegations cannot justify dissolving a marriage. The Court emphasised that medical records alone are insufficient to establish a mental health condition when their contents have not been properly proved through relevant evidence.
A Division Bench of Justice Ashok S. Kinagi and Justice Subramanya Rangarao upheld the Family Court's decision refusing to grant a divorce. The Bench also clarified that irretrievable breakdown of marriage, by itself, is not a statutory ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Background
The couple married on May 19, 2019, according to Hindu rites and ceremonies at Tirumala Tirupati Temple in Andhra Pradesh. They lived together for approximately four weeks before the wife left the matrimonial home on June 25, 2019.
The husband subsequently sought divorce, alleging that his wife was absent-minded, suffered from a mental disorder and had treated him with cruelty. He relied on hospital receipts and medical reports, claiming that he had taken her for treatment.
The wife denied the allegations and opposed the divorce petition. The Family Court at Bidar dismissed the husband's plea and also rejected her counterclaim seeking compensation. The husband then approached the High Court challenging that decision.
The High Court found that the husband had not examined the treating doctor or any medical expert to establish the alleged mental disorder. Although hospital documents had been produced, their contents had not been proved through the necessary evidence.
The Bench observed:
“Mere production or marking of documents ipso facto cannot be construed as allegations being established. In other words, mere marking of documents does not dispense with the burden of proving.”
The Court also considered the husband's admissions during cross-examination, including his statement that he had no psychiatric certificate concerning the alleged absent-mindedness. These admissions further weakened his claim.
The Bench held that the allegations of cruelty were unsupported by sufficient oral or documentary evidence. It noted that the parties had lived together for only about four weeks and that the husband had not initiated proceedings seeking restitution of conjugal rights.
Emphasising the importance of protecting individual dignity, the judgment stated:
“Unsubstantiated claims of mental disorder or absent-mindedness amount to legal cruelty, as they attack a person’s core dignity and right to live a dignified, peaceful life with reputation on the touchstone of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, inasmuch as such allegations would leave an unfavourable imprint on the life of a person in a civilized society”
The Court further rejected the argument that an irretrievably broken marriage automatically entitled the husband to divorce. It explained that irretrievable breakdown is not independently listed as a ground for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Finding no legal or evidentiary basis to interfere with the Family Court's judgment, the Karnataka High Court dismissed the appeal.
The refusal to grant a decree of divorce was therefore upheld.
