Saranjit Kaur (Hura) vs. Inder Singh Hura, 2026

Marriage solemnized on 27 April 2005, with a son born in 2007.

Wife left the matrimonial home on 2 November 2009 and did not reconcile thereafter.

Husband filed a divorce suit in January 2010, citing mental cruelty.

Wife lodged a criminal complaint one month later, alleging:

• Assault and attempt to set her and her son on fire.

• Other accusations against the husband.

Criminal cases filed by the wife were acquitted for lack of evidence, and she was the sole supporting witness.

Husband’s testimony detailed persistent quarrels, abusive conduct, and false accusations by the wife.

Husband’s elder brother (PW-2) corroborated events occurring inside the household.

Wife’s mother (DW-3) admitted her daughter’s stubbornness, adamant behavior, and reckless allegations.

Separation lasted nearly 17 years, with no intention of resuming cohabitation (“animus revertendi”).

Trial Court granted divorce on grounds of mental cruelty and irretrievable breakdown.

Wife appealed against the divorce decree, challenging the findings.

Division Bench dismissed the wife’s appeal and upheld the Trial Court’s divorce decree.

Wife’s conduct — habitual quarrels, reckless allegations, lodging false criminal complaints, and causing arrest and humiliation of husband — was held to constitute mental cruelty.

Husband’s evidence and family corroboration were credible and consistent, while the wife’s evidence weakened her case.

Court noted the timing and nature of the criminal complaints suggested retaliation for the divorce proceedings rather than genuine grievance.

Irretrievable breakdown of marriage over 17 years reinforced the mental cruelty finding.

Court clarified that the permanent alimony/maintenance issue remains to be considered separately.

Relied on Supreme Court precedent (Rakesh Raman v. Kavita, 2023) confirming that irretrievable breakdown constitutes mental cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia).

Court emphasized the qualitative distinction between minor marital disputes and mental cruelty, validating cumulative evidence.

Family witnesses were deemed credible, providing first-hand account of household events.

Timing of complaints indicated retaliatory intent rather than genuine grievances.

Long-term separation and absence of intent to reconcile strengthened the cruelty finding.

Judgment reinforces Supreme Court precedent: irretrievable breakdown can be treated as mental cruelty.

Demonstrates judicial balancing: protecting spouses from false allegations while upholding matrimonial rights.

Sets a precedent for evaluating cumulative conduct in divorce proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act.