#matrimonial cruelty

The court held that Section 498A IPC presupposes a valid marriage; where the complainant's prior marriage remained undissolved at the time of the second marriage, the latter is void ab initio, rendering Section 498A inapplicable. Vague allegations and evidence of ulterior motive further justified quashing the FIR against the mother-in-law under Section 482 CrPC. The ruling clarifies that cruelty provisions cannot be invoked to police relationships lacking legal marital status.

Kerala High Court ruled that baseless extramarital allegations and a spouse's attempted suicide constitute mental cruelty under Hindu Marriage Act. The judgment allows a divorce petition, emphasizing the spouse's conduct as sufficient grounds for dissolution.

The Supreme Court ruled that a woman’s pursuit of her professional career and decision to live separately for her child’s welfare cannot be construed as cruelty or desertion under matrimonial law. The judgment underscores that marriage does not extinguish a woman’s autonomy, and societal expectations cannot override her right to dignity and self-determination.

Bombay High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 504, and 506 IPC against a husband and wife residing in the USA, ruling that general allegations without specific instances of cruelty or harassment fail to establish a prima facie case. The judgment reinforces that distant relatives cannot be prosecuted based on omnibus accusations, setting a precedent for matrimonial disputes involving non-resident accused.

The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that systematically manipulating marital property, filing baseless criminal cases against a spouse and their family, and weaponizing children to fabricate allegations amount to severe mental cruelty under Section 10(x). This sets a critical precedent for recognizing economic and psychological abuse as valid grounds for divorce, empowering victims trapped in coercive, non-physical marital environments.

Delhi High Court sets aside a divorce decree under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, ruling that allegations of cruelty must be supported by cumulative, corroborated evidence. The court held that procedural flaws, such as drawing adverse inferences without issuing a Section 73 notice under the Evidence Act, vitiate the decree. The judgment reinforces that marital cruelty must involve grave and sustained conduct, proven by credible evidence.

Bombay High Court holds that Section 113A of the Indian Evidence Act cannot be invoked without prior proof of cruelty and suicidal intent; acquittal upheld in 498-A and 306 IPC case.

Jharkhand High Court holds that isolated marital discord and unproven criminal allegations do not constitute cruelty under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Kerala High Court holds that desertion under Hindu Marriage Act is proven even without precise commencement date if consistent incidents and conduct establish abandonment.

Chhattisgarh High Court clarifies that maintenance under Section 125 CrPC requires proof of cruelty or unjustified desertion, not mere allegations of extramarital affairs.

Jharkhand High Court clarifies that mental cruelty under Hindu Marriage Act requires grave, sustained conduct making cohabitation unreasonable, not mere marital discord.