Last Updated:
HC noted couple’s relationship deteriorated after Shradha obtained a Ph.D. and secured a principalship at a school, while her husband’s legal practice suffered during pandemic
The court took note of letters written by the wife in September 2020.
The Chhattisgarh High Court recently dissolved a 29-year-old marriage after holding that a wife’s repeated humiliation of her husband during his financial crisis, coupled with her voluntary abandonment of the marital home, constituted mental cruelty and desertion under law.
A division bench of Justice Rajani Dubey and Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad on August 18 set aside the Durg Family Court’s order which had dismissed advocate Anil Kumar Sonmani’s divorce plea against his wife, Shradha Tiwari (Sonmani).
Recommended Stories
The court noted that the couple’s relationship deteriorated after Shradha obtained a Ph.D. and secured a principalship at a school in Kurud, while her husband’s legal practice suffered during the COVID-19 pandemic. According to the court, instead of offering support, Shradha “became disrespectful, frequently taunted him for being unemployed and engaged in repeated verbal altercations”, which amounted to cruelty in law.
The marriage was solemnised in December 1996 at Bhilai. The couple had two children, a daughter, now 19, lives with her mother, while the 16-year-old son remains with the father.
The court took note of letters written by the wife in September 2020, where she clearly declared her intent to sever ties with her husband and son, and informed the Bhilai Mahila Police Station that she was leaving of her own free will.
The HC observed that this act demonstrated animus deserendi, the intention to end cohabitation permanently, fulfilling the legal requirements of desertion.
Despite being served summons, Shradha never appeared before the Family Court or the High Court to contest the allegations. This, the bench said, meant that the husband’s testimony and supporting evidence stood unrebutted.
In 2023, the Family Court had dismissed Sonmani’s divorce plea, citing a counseling report that suggested the wife wanted to continue the marriage. The High Court criticised this reliance, noting that the report was never formally exhibited in evidence and could not override uncontroverted testimony.
The bench found that the Family Court had failed to appreciate that cruelty under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act includes insults and humiliation that make it impossible for spouses to live together. By ridiculing her husband’s unemployment during a period of vulnerability and later abandoning him, the wife had crossed that threshold, the bench held.
Drawing from Supreme Court precedents, including V. Bhagat v. D. Bhagat (1994) and K. Srinivasa Rao v. D.A. Deepa (2013), the HC emphasised that prolonged separation and sustained hostility render reunion impossible.
The HC concluded that the marriage had reached an “irretrievable breakdown” and that any attempt to force continuation would only prolong suffering. Accordingly, the bench dissolved the marriage, granting divorce to the husband while making no order as to costs.
About the Author
Salil Tiwari, Senior Special Correspondent at Lawbeat, reports on the Allahabad High Court and courts in Uttar Pradesh, however, she also writes on important cases of national importance and public interests fr…Read More
Salil Tiwari, Senior Special Correspondent at Lawbeat, reports on the Allahabad High Court and courts in Uttar Pradesh, however, she also writes on important cases of national importance and public interests fr… Read More
Loading comments…
Read More
