The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently stated that presuming working women to be leading adulterous lives outside the home would harm the reputation of the entire female community.

The Division Bench of Justices Sudhir Singh and Harsh Bunger made this observation while reviewing an appeal concerning a divorce granted by the Family Court to a lawyer, based on allegations of his wife's cruelty and adultery.

The High Court remarked that the trial judge had improperly assumed a relationship between the man's wife and a former judicial officer with whom she had previously worked.

“One cannot lose sight of the fact that in the present modern day times, women are engaged in every field and they are not only working in offices but also doing business independently and they are well placed in many offices, institutions, companies etc., in this era. Merely because women are moving out of the home for work or business purpose(s) and even travelling with their male colleagues or senior officials in relation to their work/business, that itself cannot be a determinative factor to presume that all such women have developed intimacy with such persons and leading an adulterous life,” the Bench observed.

It further stated that mere allegations or inferences are insufficient to establish the existence of an adulterous relationship.

The couple in question married in February 2014. However, due to marital discord, they soon began living separately, and the husband later sought a divorce on grounds of cruelty, adultery, and desertion. 

He accused his wife of persistent refusal to engage in sexual relations, neglecting his physically handicapped mother, stealing a t-shirt from a mall, and damaging his reputation by alleging impotence to his friends and colleagues. Additionally, he claimed that she attempted to persuade his clients to withdraw their cases from him and alleged that she was involved in an adulterous relationship with a former judge who had been dismissed for corruption.

The wife contested the allegations, asserting that her husband and his mother had been demanding substantial sums of money during their marriage. She claimed that she was subjected to abuse and physical torture by her husband. Regarding the theft of the t-shirt, she argued that the husband had placed it in her bag while she was trying on clothes.

In 2021, the trial court concluded that the husband had successfully proven his case, finding that the wife had treated him with cruelty and was leading an adulterous life. The wife then appealed to the High Court, challenging these findings and the divorce decree.

During the appeal, the High Court encouraged the couple to reach an amicable settlement, but these efforts were unsuccessful. Consequently, the Court decided to evaluate the case based on its merits.

At the outset, the Court noted that allegations of adultery must be substantiated with relevant evidence presented in a court of law. After reviewing the evidence provided by the husband, the Court determined that he had failed to establish the claims of adultery.

The trial court had previously examined the allegation that the wife was leading an “ultra-modern” lifestyle and living with another person in the same rented accommodation while in Australia. The High Court found that the shared accommodation was a necessity due to a housing shortage caused by floods in Australia. It also noted that similar circumstances had occurred prior to the marriage.

“Moreover, taking shared accommodation during the period when the persons are pursuing their studies or in early days of one’s career and that too in a foreign country, is not an unknown circumstance. It is a matter of common knowledge and quite normal as well that majority of students who come from not very affluent families, while pursuing their studies or in early phases of their careers, do take shared rented accommodations and not only in foreign countries, but in India as well,” the High Court added.

However, the High Court concurred with the husband on his allegations of cruelty. It found that the wife had lodged complaints against him and his mother with the intent of provoking police action. The Court dismissed her argument that these actions were taken solely to preserve her marriage.

Additionally, the wife had filed complaints with the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana and allegedly created a disturbance at the bar body's premises.

Regarding the allegation of stealing a dress at a mall, the Court observed that the woman had not provided any evidence to refute the claim.

The Court concluded that the marriage was beyond repair. It noted that overturning the divorce decree would force the couple to live together in ongoing disharmony, mental stress, and strain, thereby perpetuating the cruelty.

“Resultantly, while reversing the findings on adultery, we uphold the impugned judgment and decree dissolving marriage between the parties on the ground of cruelty and the instant appeal is accordingly, dismissed,” the Court ordered.

Senior Advocate RS Bains and advocate Mohan Singh Chauhan represented the wife.

Senior Advocate SK Garg Narwana with advocates Ravinder Singh Randhawa and Nitin Sachdeva represented the husband.