teacher marrying student fraudulently
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 728 of 2020
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHAT
DHARMENDRA BABUBHAI PRAJAPATI
Versus
KHUSHALIBEN D/O MAHESHBHAI PATEL
6. The above propositions provide background to
assess the grounds of desertion and cruelty on which
the decree of divorce has been passed. The evidence
suggested in no uncertain terms that the respondent
was driven out of matrimonial house and was deserted
in the year 2013. These were acts and conduct
amounting to cruelty to the wife. Before noticing
them from the facts on record and the evidence, the
concept of cruelty as judicially recognised and
perceived to be a statutory ground for passing decree
for dissolution of marriage. Section 13(1)(ia)of the
Act envisages ground of cruelty providing that where
other party has, after solemnization of marriage,
Page 16 of 23
Downloaded on : Tue Feb 14 13:34:56 IST 2023
C/FA/728/2020 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/01/2023
treated the petitioner with cruelty, the marriage may
be dissolved.
6.1 In G.V.N. Kameshvar Rao vs. G. Jebily[AIR 2002
SC 576], the Supreme Court observed that since
cruelty is not being defined, the inference of
cruelty-mental cruelty in particular has to be drawn
from the circumstances of each case. It was observed
that dimensions and parameters of cruelty cannot be
circumscribed.
6.2 In Smt. Mayadevi vs. Jagdish Prasad [AIR 2007
SC 1426], the Supreme Court held that where the
cruelty is alleged and in the divorce proceedings,
the proof as regards the element of cruelty is
elicited, the concept of proof beyond reasonable
doubt would not apply.
6.2.1 The Court observed,
"In delicate human relationship like
matrimony, one has to see the probabilities
of the case. The concept, a proof beyond
the shadow of doubt, is to be applied to
criminal trials and not to civil matters
and certainly not to matters of such
delicate personal relationship as those of
husband and wife. Therefore, one has to see
what are the probabilities in a case and
legal cruelty has to be found out, not
merely as a matter of fact, but as the
effect on the mind of the complainant
spouse because of the acts or omissions of
the other. Cruelty may be physical or
corporeal or may be mental. In physical
Page 17 of 23
Downloaded on : Tue Feb 14 13:34:56 IST 2023
C/FA/728/2020 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/01/2023
cruelty, there can be tangible and direct
evidence, but in the case of mental cruelty
there may not at the same time be direct
evidence. In cases where there is no direct
evidence, Courts are required to probe into
the mental process and mental effect of
incidents that are brought out in evidence.
It is in this view that one has to consider
the evidence in matrimonial disputes."
(para 9)
6.2.2 As the expression "cruelty" has not been
defined in the Act, it has to be gathered from the
facts of each case. The cruelty may be physical or
mental to be the ground for dissolution of marriage.
To judge the mental cruelty, host of factors
attending to facts of the case may become relevant.
6.2.3 In Smt. Mayadevi (supra), the Apex Court
stated the question of mental cruelty,
"The question of mental cruelty has to be
considered in the light of the norms of marital
ties of the particular society to which the
parties belong, their social values, status,
environment in which they live. Cruelty, as
noted above, includes mental cruelty, which
falls within the purview of a matrimonial wrong.
Cruelty need not be physical. If from the
conduct of his spouse same is established and/or
an inference can be legitimately drawn that the
treatment of the spouse is such that it causes
an apprehension in the mind of the other spouse,
about his or her mental welfare then this
conduct amounts to cruelty."
(para 9)
6.2.4 It was observed that cruelty is a concept
used to be employed in relation to human conduct and
Page 18 of 23
Downloaded on : Tue Feb 14 13:34:56 IST 2023
C/FA/728/2020 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/01/2023
human behaviour. It is to be judged from the
disposition of spouse towards other. Assessing the
proof of physical cruelty may not pose any
difficulty, however, when the cruelty is of mental
nature, well it is a matter of inference to be drawn
by taking into account the nature of conduct and its
effect on the complaining spouse. The Supreme Court
stated that in a given case, there may be the conduct
which itself is bad enough and per se not approvable
to amount to cruelty.
6.3 In Vishwanath Sitaram Agrawal vs. Sarla
Vishwanath Agrawal [AIR 2012 SC 2586], the Apex Court
observed in paragraph 17 of the judgment that,
"The expression ‘cruelty’ has an inseparable
nexus with human conduct or human behaviour. It
is always dependent upon the social strata or
the milieu to which the parties belong, their
ways of life, relationship, temperaments and
emotions that have been conditioned by their
social status."
6.3.1 It was however observed that cruelty may
have nexus with the culture and human value in a
particular society and the conditions which may be
attached to the matrimonial tie,"....The cruelty
alleged may largely depend upon the type of life the
parties are accustomed to or their economic and
social conditions. It may also depend upon their
culture and human values to which they attach
importance."
6.4 Assessed and considered in the above light,
Page 19 of 23
Downloaded on : Tue Feb 14 13:34:56 IST 2023
C/FA/728/2020 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/01/2023
certain facts manifested from record stare at the
face. The relationship between the appellant and the
respondent-original plaintiff was a teacher-student
relationship. According to the case of wife, she was
forced and trapped to contract marriage. There is
gainsaying that the appellant held the position of
dominance and trust both. The plaintiff aged 28 years
was the student in the Polytechnic College. The
husband aged 40 years was the teacher who used to
take the classes where the plaintiff was also one of
the pupil.
...
6.7 The case put forth by wife was not rebutted by the appellant husband. In the totality of facts, the plaintiff could be said to have proved her case. Cruelty is not a defined concept. Whether cruelty is acted upon or not depends upon facts and circumstances. It is only the facts and circumstances of the particular case, which helped to determine that cruelty was proved or not as legal ground to grant the decree of divorce. A student forced to marry a teacher, both having large gap in terms of age and prospects, and post marriage treatment meted out to the plaintiff in the present case makes out to prove that the plaintiff wife was subjected to cruelty.