She met her ex once, her husband calls It adultery, here is what the court said

NEW DELHI: The Punjab and Haryana high court has held that a single meeting between a married woman and her former partner cannot by itself be treated as proof of adultery, while upholding a divorce granted on the separate ground of cruelty.A bench comprising Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill and Justice Ramesh Kumari made the observation while dismissing an appeal filed by a woman against a Family Court order dissolving her marriage under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.What was the case about?The marriage between the parties was solemnised on November 16, 2021. The husband, who works in the Indian Navy, approached the Family Court seeking divorce on grounds of cruelty and adultery.He alleged that his wife was quarrelsome, remained occupied on her mobile phone for long hours with strangers, refused to perform marital obligations and was in contact with another man.The husband further claimed that on January 11, 2023, he went to the other man's house and found his wife there in a compromising position, having called her father and brother to the spot, after which they took her back to her parental home.The wife denied all allegations and instead accused the husband and his family of dowry harassment. She also alleged that her father-in-law had "bad eyes" on her and that her husband abused her and supported his father despite her complaints.What did the Family Court find?The Family Court examined the wife's allegations closely and found several inconsistencies in her statements.The court noted that although she claimed her father-in-law behaved inappropriately with her, she later admitted during cross-examination that her father-in-law used to drop her to college regularly."It is highly improbable to believe that respondent No. 1 would commute with the same person i.e. her father-in-law, who is having bad eyes on her," the Family Court observed.The court also found her claim that a Bullet motorcycle had been given as dowry to be unsupported by evidence. During cross-examination, she admitted that no such motorcycle had ever been given as dowry.The Family Court concluded that levelling "reckless, irresponsible and false allegations" against the husband and his family amounted to mental cruelty.What did the courts say about the adultery allegation?The Family Court, whose finding the High Court endorsed, clarified that the facts did not establish adultery."Conduct of respondent-wife in meeting respondent No. 2 (with whom she was in relationship earlier) alone on 11.01.2023 being a single incident cannot be said that she is living in adultery with respondent No. 2 nor her previous relationship with respondent No. 2 before marriage tantamount to an offence of adultery for the respondent-husband," the Family Court added.The high court further agreed with this finding and held that even the wife's previous relationship before marriage could not automatically amount to adultery.Despite rejecting the allegation of adultery, the high court upheld the divorce decree on the ground of cruelty.The bench found no reason to interfere with the Family Court's judgment and held that the wife's allegations against the husband and his family, made without sufficient evidence, caused mental cruelty.