Chhattisgarh High Court: Wife’s Suspicions of Husband’s Late Nights Not Cruelty

The Chhattisgarh High Court recently ruled that a wife’s doubts about her husband coming home late frequently and suspecting him of having an affair cannot be considered an act of cruelty. The division bench, led by Justices Goutam Bhaduri and Deepak Kumar Tiwari, found that such conduct by the wife under these circumstances was “normal human behavior” and could not be deemed cruel.

The case revolved around a husband who frequently returned home late at night, and sometimes did not return home at all. He cited his involvement in political activities as the reason for his late arrivals. The husband claimed that his wife was being cruel by doubting his character based on these late-night arrivals. A family court had previously granted the husband’s request for a divorce, which the wife then challenged in the High Court.

The High Court’s opinion was that the wife’s doubts about her husband would not have arisen if the husband’s behavior was different or better explained. The bench noted that the allegations against the husband were made due to his abnormal and unexplained behavior. The husband, in turn, suspected his wife of talking to her brother’s friends. The court stressed the importance of trust between spouses and maintaining a minimum standard of belief in each other.

The High Court’s ruling highlights that in a husband-wife relationship, mutual trust is essential, and it is not expected that the wife should comply with the husband’s wishes in her interactions with others, unless there is concrete evidence to cast doubt on her character.

With these observations, the High Court overturned the family court’s 2017 judgment, which had granted the husband a divorce. The judgment underscores the significance of trust and effective communication in marital relationships and emphasizes that doubts stemming from a spouse’s unexplained behavior may not be grounds for cruelty in a marriage.

Advocates Sumesh Bajaj and Rishabh Bajaj represented the wife, while Advocates Anup Majumdar and Saket Pandey represented the husband in this case.