Courts cannot examine intimate moments of couples unless extreme cruelty involved: Allahabad High Court

The manner in which married couple conduct themselves in the privacy of their relationship is not for the courts to rule upon, the Allahabad High Court recently said..A Division Bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Donadi Ramesh made the observation while dealing with an appeal moved by a woman against grant of divorce in the case initiated by her husband.The Bench stressed that the issue of husband’s different preferences in intimate moments, than those desired by the wife, must be best resolved by the couple without any intervention from the Court. “What personal likes, preferences and habits, acts a party to a marriage may feel inclined to practise and indulge in and desire their partner to participate in, within the confines of that relationship that too involving intimate moments is not for the Court to explore or examine unless they involve acts of ex facie extreme cruelty and/ or depravity,” the Court said.It made the comments in the context of alleged cruelty pleaded by the husband as a ground of divorce.The couple had married in 1999 and just after 11 months, the husband filed for divorce. A family court ruled in favour of the husband in 2015.Challenging the divorce, the counsel representing the wife argued that the husband’s plea for dissolution of marriage was not maintainable as it had been filed within one year from the date of marriage..The High Court agreed that the petition for divorce within one year of marriage is not permitted under the Hindu Marriage Act. “In fact on a wholesome reading of the provision it reveals that cause of action to dissolve a Hindu marriage may not arise to a party thereto, within the first year of marriage, except in cases involving 'extreme hardship' or 'extreme depravity' suffered by the petitioner. Barring those two contingencies, no other exist.”It added that even then, a specific application has to be filed for seeking permission to file the petition within one year of marriage..The Court further said the passing of decision in the divorce case after one year does not make the legal bar irrelevant. “If that petition could not be filed, because no cause of action arose, the petition may not become competent by passage of time as cause of action may only be seen to arise with reference to the date of presentation of a petition, and not later,” it reasoned.The issue ought to have been dealt with by the trial court, the Bench said as it found that the family court had not returned any finding on the wife’s objection..On cruelty, the High Court noted that the family court had referred to and relied upon the conduct of the wife during the course of legal proceedings that she had filed 3-4 cases against the husband.“That was not the cruelty alleged by the respondent. It was extraneous to the dispute,” it said, adding how the wife fought to resist divorce can never be construed as cruel behaviour.Thus, the Court said there were no grounds to grant divorce. It added that the wife had been dragged into needless litigation..Accordingly, it allowed the appeal and set aside the family court’s decision. A cost of ₹50,000 was also imposed on the husband.“We are informed that the respondent had deposited Rs. 2,50,000/- before the learned Court below in compliance to the impugned judgment and order. Let costs awarded be paid therefrom. The balance amount together with accrued interest be refunded to the respondent, after ensuring that all recoveries outstanding against the respondent towards maintenance amount awarded to the appellant are satisfied,” it ordered..Advocate Gopal Misra represented the appellant-wife.Advocates Syed Irfan Ali and Ajit Kumar represented the husband..[Read Judgment]