Wife insisting on living separately from in-laws without valid reason counts for cruelty: Delhi HC

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has said that a wife’s persistent insistence to live separately from her in-laws, without a valid reason, constitutes an act of cruelty towards the husband. In a divorce case, a bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna observed that unlike Western countries, it is not customary […]

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has said that a wife’s persistent insistence to live separately from her in-laws, without a valid reason, constitutes an act of cruelty towards the husband.

In a divorce case, a bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna observed that unlike Western countries, it is not customary in India for a son to get separated from his family upon marriage; instead, his wife becomes an integral part of the family. The court noted that unless there is a strong and valid reason, a wife should not insist on her husband leaving his family to live separately.

---

In the case at hand, the husband sought divorce based on various grounds, including the wife’s disruptive behaviour and insistence on separate living arrangements. The court said that a husband generally would not want to be separated from his parents and family, and a wife’s persistent efforts to enforce such separation can be considered an act of cruelty towards the husband. The wife’s lack of justifiable reason for her demand to live separately, coupled with her whimsical insistence, led the court to conclude that her actions constituted an act of cruelty.

The court cited a Supreme Court decision that highlighted the cultural norm in India, where it’s expected for the wife to become a part of the husband’s family after marriage, rather than encouraging the separation of the son from his parents. Given the acrimonious atmosphere and the wife’s elusive conduct over an extended period, the court said that the circumstances were a source of mental cruelty.

With no matrimonial relationship since 2007 and the wife’s expressed intention not to rejoin the husband, the court granted the divorce decree.