that the appellant was interested more in other girls and less in him, an
allegation which falls far short of a plea of adulterous relationship, but
material enough to decide the strange matrimonial relationship between
the parties, is in paragraph 58 of the impugned decision. It reads as
under:-
“58. It is settled law that the acts of cruelty with dates and
occasions and the places where such acts were committed
must be specifically mentioned in the petition. The
petitioner has, however, failed to do so. The petitioner has
leveled different baseless allegations and has made no
efforts to prove the same. The petitioner merely claimed
that the respondent has leveled baseless allegations of his
having extramarital affairs with different women/girls and
this caused him cruelty. I am not in conformity with the
petitioner. It has come over the record that the petitioner
himself had been indifferent towards the respondent. He did
not offer any explanation to the respondent as to why the
girls/women had been calling him. In such circumstances,
she would have thought that the petitioner had extra-marital
relations with other girls/women. It has, however, come
over the record that she has not specified any girl or woman
with whom the petitioner had alleged extra marital
relations. In fact, she has been throughout ready and
willing to join the company/society of the petitioner. If the
respondent had any doubt/suspicion against the petitioner,
that were due to his conduct only and he alone is
responsible for the same. Moreover, the allegations made
against the husband do not in terms of mental torture and
agony necessarily have a similar impact. The reason why a
false charge of unchastity against the wife is viewed
seriously, is because of the high moral ground of which the
fidelity and commitment of Hindu wives is placed towards
the husbands. A false allegation of infidelity made against
the husband can be treated as mental torture only if such
torture is proved as a fact. The social milieu in which the
parties live, their value system and outlook also assume
importance in such a situation.”
10. The finding returned by the learned Judge Family Court against the
appellant proceeds on the assumption that the testimony of the respondent
proves that the appellant was in touch over the telephone with many
women and this was the reason why he was indifferent towards the
respondent. The learned Judge Family Court has held against the
appellant on the ground that the appellant had to render an explanation as
to why so many women were calling him. The learned Judge has held
that the appellant had to remove the suspicion from the mind of his wife.
A gender bias approach to the issue is revealed, when the learned Judge
reasons that unchastity by a wife is to be viewed seriously because a
higher level of fidelity is expected from a wife. An allegation of
infidelity made against the husband cannot be treated as mental torture.
The approach by the learned Judge is totally perverse and contrary to law.
An act of infidelity by either spouse, irrespective of the gender is on an
equal footing and would cause mental cruelty to the other spouse with the
same intensity. The assumption by the learned Judge that the respondent
has established the appellant being in touch with many women is
incorrect, for the reason it was an allegation made by the respondent
against the appellant and she had to prove the same.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dated : February 06, 2017
FAO 366/2012
NAVRATAN BAID v NEETU BAID
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA
