Mocking Husband's Disability Is Mental Cruelty: Orissa High Court Upholds Divorce Without Alimony

News18

a day ago

Last Updated:
The court confirmed that such conduct destroyed the sanctity of the marital relationship, making cohabitation untenable
The Orissa High Court has upheld a divorce granted to a physically disabled man after it was proven that his wife had mocked his disability, terming such conduct as mental cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The bench of Justices BP Routray and Chittaranjan Dash, while dismissing the wife's appeal, observed that her repeated insults toward the husband's physical infirmity, including calling him names like 'Kempa" (cripple) and 'Nikhatu" (useless), clearly amounted to mental cruelty, warranting dissolution of the marriage under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Act.
The marriage between the parties was solemnised on June 1, 2016. According to the husband's testimony, the wife left the matrimonial home merely three months later on September 15, 2016, returned briefly in January 2017, but ultimately left for good on March 25, 2018. She later filed a criminal case under Section 498-A IPC and other provisions, accusing the husband and his family of cruelty.
The husband filed a divorce petition on April 3, 2019, on the ground of mental cruelty. He examined two witnesses to support his claims. Despite cross-examining them, the wife neither examined any witnesses nor produced any evidence to counter the allegations.
The family court in Puri, in its judgment dated July 10, 2023, ruled in favour of the husband, granting a decree of divorce without awarding permanent alimony. The wife challenged this order before the high court.
Dismissing the appeal, the high court said that the evidence on record clearly showed the wife's demeaning behaviour toward her husband's disability. 'Such behaviour by the wife…definitely in our opinion amounts to mental cruelty," the court observed.
It emphasised that in a marital relationship, mutual respect is essential, and ridiculing a spouse's physical shortcomings can gravely impact their dignity and emotional well-being.
The court cited key precedents, including V Bhagat v. D Bhagat and Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh, to explain the evolving contours of 'mental cruelty" in matrimonial law. It reiterated that conduct which causes deep mental pain, making it unreasonable to expect the spouses to live together, can be sufficient ground for divorce.
'A person is expected to give respect to another person in general and where it comes to relationship of husband and wife, it is expected that the wife should support the husband despite his physical infirmity, if any," court said.
On the issue of permanent alimony and return of Streedhan, the court noted that no material was presented on the income or assets of either party, and thus left the matter open for the wife to pursue separately under Sections 25 and 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the family court.
First Published:
June 12, 2025, 15:16 IST