Indian court labels denial of sex to spouse for long time as 'mental cruelty'

In a divorce case, India's Allahabad High Court observed that if a spouse denies having sexual intercourse with their partner for a long period without any valid reason, then the act amounts to mental cruelty.

The court observed that the appellant Ravindra Pratap Yadav had alleged his wife Asha Devi "had no respect for marital bond, denied to discharge obligation of marital liability", which resulted in a "complete breakdown" of their marriage.

Yadav had filed a petition challenging the Varanasi family court's 2005 order which had dismissed his divorce plea, citing Section 13 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

The High Court had stated that a "hyper-technical approach" was adopted by the lower court and dismissed Yadav's case.

ALSO READ |India: Most divorces arising from love marriages only, says Supreme Court

Couple granted divorce by Panchayat

Add WION as a Preferred Source

The divorce case was filed by Ravindra Pratap Yadav on the ground that a mutually agreed divorce had already been finalised in the community Panchayat.

He had further alleged mental cruelty, "denying to co-habit and discharge the obligation of marital life" and added that the married couple was living separately for a good amount of time.

As per Yadav, the couple had married in May 1979 and the behaviour of his wife changed after some time and she was unwilling to cohabit with him.

Later, his wife started living at her parents' house. However, after six months of marriage, Yadav claimed that he made efforts to convince his wife and bring her back, however, she refused.

In July 1994, the village held a panchayat where the parties reached an agreement and mutually got divorced. The petitioner added that he was paying alimony of Rs 22,000 ($266) to his wife.

WATCH |Gravitas Plus: India has the lowest divorce rate in the world. Here's why

However, when Yadav demanded a decree of divorce based on mental cruelty, divorce agreement and desertion, his wife did not turn up in court.

“Undoubtedly, not allowing a spouse for a long time, to have sexual intercourse by his or her partner, without sufficient reason, itself amounts to mental cruelty to such spouse...Since there is no acceptable view in which a spouse can be compelled to resume life with the consort, nothing is given by trying to keep the parties tied forever to a marriage than that has ceased to in fact," stated Bench of Justices Suneet Kumar and Rajendra Kumar-IV said.

The bench referred to a 2006 Supreme Court judgment on the aspect of mental cruelty and found faults in the family court's order.

"It is evident from the record that since long, the parties to the marriage have been living separately, according to plaintiff-appellant, defendant-respondent had no respect for marital bond, denied discharging obligation of marital liability. There has been a complete breakdown of their marriage,” the bench added.

You cannow write forwionews.comand be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with ushere.

WATCH WION LIVE HERE