Recently, while granting divorce to an individual, Delhi High Court held that putting pressure on someone to leave their parents and live with their in-laws as a "live-in son-in-law" is akin to cruelty. This decision came after the initial dismissal of the divorce plea by a family court.

The division bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna of the Delhi High Court overturned the family court's order. They stated in their judgment that the divorce, based on cruelty and abandonment by the wife, stands.

In this case, the petitioner stated in their plea that their marriage took place in May 2001. Within a year, upon becoming pregnant, their wife left their in-laws' home in Gujarat and returned to her parents' home in Delhi. The petitioner claimed to have made serious efforts at reconciliation, but his wife and her parents insisted that he come to Delhi from Gujarat and live with them as a "live-in son-in-law." However, he refused to do so because he needed to take care of his elderly parents.

On the other hand, the woman alleged harassment for dowry and accused the man of being an alcoholic who subjected her to physical abuse and cruelty. Therefore, in March 2002, she left her husband's home. The High Court cited a Supreme Court decision that stated that pressuring someone's son to separate from their family is akin to cruelty.

The Delhi High Court, in its judgment, stated that in India, it is not desirable for a son to separate from his family after marriage, and as one gets older, taking care of their parents is both a moral and legal responsibility. The High Court recognized that pressuring a husband to leave his parents' home and become a "live-in son-in-law" at his wife's family is equivalent to cruelty

The court also mentioned that both parties had lived together for several months, during which they were unable to maintain their marital relationship. It was clear that hindering marital relations amounted to excessive cruelty. The court highlighted that the individual had been acquitted in a criminal case filed against him by his wife, in which she had accused him of cruelty and breaking trust. The woman's allegations were not proven, and the court stated that false complaints constitute cruelty.

Regarding the allegations of post-marital relations, the court noted that due to a prolonged separation, both the husband and wife had to seek other partners outside of their marriage. The court ultimately concluded that the evidence indicated that the woman had started living separately from her husband without any valid reason, leading to the divorce.