The Calcutta High Court lately dismissed a plea filed by a husband to quash the legal case lodged by his spouse levelling allegations of cruelty in opposition to him.

The HC rejected the argument put forth by the husband that he had solely sought mutual divorce from his spouse for she had developed a number of medical circumstances and problems, which ushered in major infertility with untimely menopause, and in retaliation to this, the spouse had filed the current legal case.

The bench of Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) noticed, “The reason of infertility is not a ground for divorce. There are several options to become parents. A spouse has to be understanding in these circumstances…If the petitioner/husband had the problem, would he not expect support from his wife to make a better life together.”

Referring to the definition of the word “cruelty” as provided under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, the judge said that in the present case, the term took a different meaning altogether and the “mental cruelty” inflicted upon the spouse was of such a nature that it brought about grave hazard to her life and well being.

Therefore, whereas opining that the fabric on the file made out a prima facie case of cognisable offence in opposition to the husband, the decide refused to entertain his plea for quashing the case proceedings.

On July 12, 2017, the spouse lodged a written criticism in opposition to the husband and his relations, based mostly on which a case bought registered beneath sections 498A/406/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, learn with sections 3/four of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

Following the investigation into the matter, the probe company submitted a chargesheet beneath sections 498A/406/323/34 of the IPC and the trial court docket took cognisance.

Challenging this, the husband moved to the excessive court docket. His counsel argued that the spouse had maliciously filed the case because it was registered only a month after the husband despatched a authorized discover to her for the initiation of proceedings for mutual divorce.

He additional submitted that although the spouse had alleged that she had been subjected to torture because the date of marriage, she filed the legal case after nearly 10 years, that too simply after a month of receiving the husband’s authorized discover for mutual divorce.

However, the court docket opined that in gentle of the spouse’s scenario, the husband’s act of looking for divorce on grounds of her medical circumstances was additionally an act of cruelty. “Thus the offence of cruelty on this case is a unbroken offence,” the court held.

Therefore, stressing that in the present case, there was substance in the allegations and material existed to prima facie make out the complicity of the husband in a cognisable offence, the court dismissed his plea.

Read all of the Latest India News right here