The Madhya Pradesh High Court has powerfully upheld a wife’s conduct—despite nearly two decades of desertion by her husband—as exemplifying the virtues of an ideal Indian woman, deeply rooted in marital duty and cultural values. The bench, comprising Justices Vivek Rusia and Binod Kumar Dwivedi, dismissed the husband’s appeal for divorce on cruelty grounds, affirming the wife’s dignified endurance and steadfast commitment to her dharma.
The couple had married in November 1998 and their son was born in December 2002. In 2006, the wife departed matrimonial life, prompting the husband—a Special Armed Force constable posted in Bhopal—to seek divorce under provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, citing desertion and cruelty, including allegations of alcoholism, extramarital relationships, and refusal of marital relations. He also claimed she neglected to join him at his place of posting.
Contradicting these claims, the wife asserted that she fulfilled her marital obligations, maintained respectful relations with her in-laws, and has continued to reside with them in the joint family home. She alleged that the husband’s divorce plea was founded on falsehoods generated to facilitate separation.
In their ruling, the High Court noted that despite the emotional trauma of abandonment, the wife preserved her self-respect and lived with her in-laws without badmouthing her husband. The judges observed that she neither courted sympathy nor sought to vilify him; instead, her steady demeanor and noble conduct spoke of inner strength.
The court remarked that while legal proceedings concern individual circumstances—not idealized marital constructs—the wife’s refusal to abandon symbols of her marriage—such as wearing mangalsutra and sindoor—demonstrated her reverence for the institution. It emphasized that marriage, in Hindu philosophy, is a sacred, eternal, and indissoluble samskara, not merely a contractual arrangement.
By refusing to sever the marital tie under the guise of desertion and cruelty, the law would risk undermining the sanctity of marriage itself. The wife’s commitment exemplified duty and dignity and merited judicial respect, not termination of the bond. Accordingly, the High Court upheld the Family Court’s decision rejecting the divorce petition.
The Court acknowledged that it does not rule in pursuit of ideal spouses—but rather the unique individuals before it. In this instance, the wife’s conduct, anchored in ancient cultural norms and personal resilience, outweighed allegations rooted in disruption, vindicating her right to remain bound by marriage.
In dismissing the divorce plea, the High Court reinforced that in matrimonial jurisprudence, symbolic acts like retaining mangalsutra and sindoor are significant expressions of enduring marital fidelity, particularly when divorce is sought on grounds of estrangement rather than mutual despair.
The ruling honors marital sacrifice, reinforces cultural values entwined with marriage, and underscores legal principles that prioritize relational fidelity and spiritual duty over dissolution.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.