6 min readNew DelhiJun 30, 2026 11:37 AM IST
The Jharkhand High Court has said a husband cannot seek divorce by accusing his wife of desertion when the evidence indicates that she was compelled to leave the matrimonial home due to alleged dowry-related cruelty and has consistently expressed her willingness to return. The court accordingly dismissed a man’s appeal seeking dissolution of his 25-year-old marriage.
Justices Sujit Narayan Prasad and Pradeep Kumar Srivastava were hearing a first appeal filed by an estranged husband against the July 19, 2022 judgment and July 29, 2022 decree of the Family Court, Rajmahal, which had dismissed his divorce petition filed under the Hindu Marriage Act.
“The law consistently has been laid down by the Court that desertion means the intentional abandonment of one spouse by the other without the consent of the other and without a reasonable cause… it is evident that the appellant and his family members were pressurising the respondent for demand of Rs 3,00,000/- cash, one bed and 25 Bigha of land and when their demand was not fulfilled, she along with her daughter was ousted from the matrimonial house in year 2005… Even otherwise, there is no desertion on the part of respondent-wife as she in her evidence also has deposed that she is very keen and desirous to live and stay with her husband all through her life,” said the high court on June 25, dismissing the husband’s appeal.
The couple married on May 1, 2001, but started living separately in 2005 after matrimonial disputes. Over the next two decades, they became embroiled in multiple criminal, maintenance and matrimonial proceedings, including a dowry harassment case, maintenance litigation and allegations of a second marriage, before the husband sought dissolution of marriage in 2019.
Justices Sujit Narayan Prasad and Pradeep Kumar Srivastava said that the wife had consistently expressed her willingness to return to the matrimonial home if assured of her safety. (Image generated using AI)
Husband alleged cruelty, false cases, desertion
The husband claimed that soon after the marriage, his wife constantly quarrelled with him and insisted that he live separately from his parents. According to him, when he refused, she left the matrimonial home in May 2005 and subjected him to mental cruelty by repeatedly filing false criminal cases against him and his family.
He further alleged that despite several attempts at reconciliation over the years to save the marriage, including court-sponsored mediation, the wife refused to return. He also accused her and her family of assaulting him during a reconciliation meeting in June 2017.
Claiming that the marriage had irretrievably broken down and there was no possibility of reconciliation, he sought a decree of divorce on the grounds of cruelty and desertion.
Story continues below this ad
Wife blamed husband for dowry harassment
The wife strongly contested the allegations and told the court that it was she who had been subjected to cruelty. According to her, six months after the marriage, the husband and his family demanded Rs 3 lakh in cash, a bed worth Rs 50,000 and 25 bighas of land. When her family failed to meet the demands, she alleged that she was physically and mentally harassed before being thrown out of the matrimonial home along with their daughter in 2005.
She pointed out that the criminal case she filed under Section 498A (cruelty) IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act ended in the conviction of the husband and his relatives, with the conviction also being upheld in appeal.
The wife further maintained that she had never deserted her husband voluntarily and remained willing to resume cohabitation provided he assured her safety and treated her with dignity in this marriage.
Daughter supported mother’s stand
The parties’ daughter also deposed before the family court, stating that she had always lived with her mother and that her father had neither maintained contact with her nor provided financial support.
She said she had been forced to discontinue her medical entrance preparation due to financial constraints and had returned from Patna to continue her education in Pakur.
Story continues below this ad
Court finds cruelty not proved
After examining the evidence, the high court held that the husband had failed to substantiate his allegations of cruelty in the marriage. The bench noted that while cruelty had been pleaded, no convincing material had been produced to establish that the wife’s conduct amounted to cruelty within the meaning of the Hindu Marriage Act.
The court also agreed with the family court’s finding that the allegations were vague and general in nature and lacked particulars regarding the dates, manner or circumstances of the alleged acts of cruelty.
Consequently, it held that there was no reason to interfere with the findings recorded by the trial court.
Mere separation can’t amount to desertion
- The high court also rejected the husband’s argument that the prolonged separation itself established desertion.
- Desertion means the intentional abandonment of one spouse by the other without the consent of the other and without a reasonable cause, said the court.
- Referring to settled Supreme Court law, the bench observed that desertion requires intentional and permanent abandonment of one spouse by the other without reasonable cause and against the wishes of the deserted spouse.
- In the present case, the court found that the wife had consistently expressed her willingness to return to the matrimonial home if assured of her safety, making it impossible to conclude that she intended to permanently abandon the marriage.
- The bench also noted that the evidence suggested she had left the matrimonial home after allegations of dowry-related cruelty and therefore had reasonable cause for living separately.
- The deserted spouse must prove that there is a factum of separation and there is an intention on the part of the deserting spouse to bring the cohabitation to a permanent end.
- The appellant-husband has not produced any cogent evidence in regard to the cruelty which has been subjected to him by the respondent-wife.
Appeal dismissed
Holding that the husband had failed to prove either cruelty or desertion and finding no perversity in the Family Court’s appreciation of evidence, the division bench dismissed the appeal. The high court accordingly upheld the July 19, 2022 judgment of the family court refusing to grant a decree of divorce, bringing another chapter of the couple’s long-running matrimonial litigation to a close.