Case at a glance: A Division Bench of the Jharkhand High Court has dissolved a marriage under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, reversing a Family Court decision. It held that not lodging an FIR “cannot, by itself, be treated as a ground to discredit” testimony of cruelty, and that a spouse driven out by the other's cruelty has not deserted.
The parties married in 2010 and have two children. The wife alleged that the husband became a habitual drinker, stopped working, and abused and assaulted her and the children, and drove them out in March 2018. Since then she has lived with her parents and supported the children by working as a nurse.
The husband did not appear in the Family Court or the High Court despite notice. The Family Court, Jamshedpur nonetheless dismissed her divorce petition for cruelty and desertion under Sections 27(1)(b) and 27(1)(d).
The Key Question Before the Court
Can cruelty be proved without an FIR, and does a spouse who is driven out commit desertion?
Cruelty, Desertion and Who Left
The Court held that an appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act is a full first appeal allowing reappraisal of evidence, and that the standard of proof is preponderance of probabilities. Not lodging an FIR did not discredit her testimony, and the Family Court's cruelty finding was perverse.
On desertion, separation must be paired with an intention to end cohabitation permanently, and a spouse forced out by the other's cruelty has not deserted. The husband's persistent non-appearance showed indifference to the marriage. The Court relied on Dastane, Shobha Rani, Samar Ghosh, Lachman Utamchand Kirpalani and other authorities.
What the Court Actually Held
- The Family Court judgment and decree were set aside and the marriage dissolved.
- Registry to issue the decree of dissolution.
- The children's inheritance rights are unaffected.
- The wife may seek maintenance for the children before the appropriate forum.
Why This Judgment Matters
- It protects victims of domestic cruelty who do not file police complaints.
- It clarifies desertion where one spouse is forced out.
- It confirms the scope of first appeals in family matters.
What Should Advocates Take Away From the Judgment?
For Petitioners' Counsel
- Lead detailed testimony of cruelty even without an FIR.
- Show who caused the separation when pleading desertion.
For Respondents' Counsel
- Non-appearance can be read as indifference to the marriage.
Key Takeaways
- No FIR is not fatal to a cruelty claim.
- A spouse driven out does not desert.
- First appeals allow full reappraisal.
- Divorce granted.
Frequently Asked Questions
No. The Court held its absence alone does not discredit testimony.
The Court held the wife, driven out by cruelty, did not desert.
Their inheritance rights are unaffected and the wife may seek their maintenance.
Conclusion
The judgment recognises the realities of domestic cruelty and protects the spouse who was forced to leave.
Practical takeaway: Build cruelty cases on consistent, detailed testimony; an FIR is helpful but not essential.