A Division Bench of the Kerala High Court has observed that making discreet phone calls frequently by the wife with another man disregarding the warning of the husband, that too at odd hours, amounts to marital cruelty.
The Bench made the observation while recently allowing an appeal filed by a husband against the dismissal of his petition for dissolution of marriage on the ground of adultery and cruelty by the Muvattupuzha Family Court.
The court also held that filing false complaints against the husband and his family members under Sections 498A (cruelty to a woman by her husband or his kin) and Sections 307 of the Indian Penal Code (attempt to murder) would amount to marital cruelty.
The court added that in the case of cruelty, physical violence was not essential to constitute cruelty. The conduct and behavior of a spouse towards the other need only be of such a nature that it caused reasonable apprehension in the mind of the latter that it was not safe for him or her to continue the marital tie.
The court also pointed out that evidence on record in the instant case showed that the husband and the wife were at loggerheads right from the inception of their marriage. Regardless of the subsistence of the marriage for the last 12 years, the couple was unable to patch up their differences. Thus, the court held that the husband had made out a case for granting a decree for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
According to the husband, the wife has been maintaining an illicit relationship with a colleague of hers before her marriage and even thereafter.
The court noted that even after the wife realised that the husband did not like her making such phone calls, she continued to make phone conversations with another person on almost all days, and several times on a single day. This evidence suggested matrimonial cruelty.
The court made it clear that merely for the reason that the wife used to make calls regularly, one could not jump to a conclusion that their relationship was an illicit one and that there was an adulterous act between them. The court said there must be a high degree of probability to substantiate the allegation of adultery. The evidence adduced by the husband was insufficient to prove adultery even by a preponderance of probabilities.
