Wife’s refusal to wear ‘sindoor’, ‘shaka’ amounts to refusal in accepting the marriage: Gauhati HC

Woman compelling and preventing her husband from performing his statutory duties towards his aged mother amounts to cruelty, the order states

June 30, 2020 11:49 am | Updated 11:55 am IST - Guwahati

Indian Wedding Ceremony, Indian Marriage Photo

Indian Wedding Ceremony, Indian Marriage Photo

The Gauhati High Court has granted divorce to a man, observing that the refusal to wear shaka (conch shell bangle) and sindoor (vermillion) as per customs by a Hindu married woman amounted to her refusal to accept the marriage.

After hearing a matrimonial appeal filed by the husband, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Ajai Lamba and Justice Soumitra Saikia set aside an order of the family court which rejected his prayer for divorce on the grounds that no cruelty was found on the part of the wife against him.

The man had appealed in the high court against the family court’s order.

“Her refusal to wear shaka and sindoor will project her to be unmarried and/or signify her refusal to accept the marriage with the appellant (husband). Such categorical stand of the respondent (wife) points to the clear intention of the respondent that she is unwilling to continue her conjugal life with the appellant,” the high court said in the judgment passed on June 19.

The man and the woman had married on February 17, 2012, but they started having disagreements soon as she started demanding not to live along with his family members. As a consequence, the two have been living separately since June 30, 2013.

She had lodged a police complaint against her husband and his family members accusing them of torturing her, but the allegation of subjecting her to cruelty was not sustained, the bench said.

“Such acts of lodging criminal cases on unsubstantiated allegations against the husband and/or the husband’s family members amounts to cruelty as held by the Supreme Court,” the judges said.

The family court completely ignored the fact that the woman compelled and prevented her husband from performing his statutory duties towards his aged mother under the provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, the judges said.

“Such evidence is sufficient to be construed as an act of cruelty,” the order added.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.