1 2026:CGHC:22403-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR FA(MAT) No. 377 of 2024 Abhishek Meshram S/o Late Shri Rajendra Meshram Aged About 35 Years R/o Netaji Chowk, Behind Durga Mandir Katora Talab, Raipur P.S.- Civil Line, Raipur, Tahsil And District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ... Appellant versus Smt. Jyoti Meshram W/o Shri Abhishek Meshram Aged About 33 Years D/o Shri B.L. Tamrakar R/o Behind Vardhaman Motors, Bhatagaon Raipur, P.S.- Tikrapara Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. J. N. Nande, Advocate For Respondent : None DB: Hon’ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Judgment on Board dated 12.05.2026. Per Sachin Singh Rajput, J The appellant and the respondent herein happen to be the husband and wife respectively. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and dated 20.09.2024 passed by Principal judge, Family Court, Raipur, CG in Civil Suit No. 1053/2023 rejecting the application of the petitioner filed under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as “Act of 1955”) for dissolution of marriage. 3. The admitted facts of the case are that the marriage of the appellant with 2 respondent was performed on 11.01.2007 in Arya Samaj Mandir, Baijnath Para, Raipur, as per Hindu rites and rituals. Out of their wedlock two children namely Priyanshu Meshram and Prateek Meshram were born, who at present are living the respondent herein. The parties herein are said to reside separately. It is stated that when the respondent came to reside with the appellant after marriage, her behaviour was proper and cordial for about three years. Thereafter, there was a sudden change in her behaviour and she started misbehaving with him. She always used to remain engaged in telephonic conversations with her male friend, and whenever the appellant questioned her regarding the same, she would quarrel and fight with him. The respondent was of extremely stubborn, adamant and ill- mannered nature due to which she always desired to live according to her own wishes. It is stated that she did not show respect towards any member of the family. The appellant was severely harassed and mentally disturbed due to the behaviour of the Respondent. The appellant somehow continued to tolerate the conduct of the Respondent in the hope that her behaviour would improve with the passage of time but no improvement whatsoever was seen in her. Rather her behavioral attitude worsened day by day. The respondent started threatening and intimidating the appellant and also became aggressive to the extent of physically assaulting him. Further, she lodged false complaints against the appellant at the Mahila Thana with the intention of harassing him. As a result of this, the appellant became extremely distressed and his health also deteriorated. Thereafter, she left the matrimonial home along with both the children and also took away all her belongings and did not return since then. The appellant further states that after leaving his house, the Respondent has been residing with another man. It is stated that since the year 2021 the appellant has been undergoing treatment for liver and stomach ailments and his condition had become extremely serious but the respondent never came to take care of him nor did she make any efforts for his treatment. It is further stated that the respondent even started assaulting the persons who were taking care of him and also took away his mobile phone and the keys of the house. 3 4. It is stated in the application that the appellant underwent an operation of his leg due to which is been unable to walk properly and there is no person available to take care of him. On 25.06.2023 the Respondent came to the house of the appellant along with her both sons and certain other persons and assaulted the appellant. The respondent is also stated to have driven away the domestic help working in the appellant’s house, and also threatened to kill the appellant as well. Respondent is also stated to suffer from insomnia and used to consume sleeping pills. On one occasion it is stated that after a quarrel, she intentionally consumed excessive sleeping pills and made an allegation against the appellant that he administered those pills to her with an intention to kill her. It is further stated by the appellant that the respondent had been deliberately harassing and tormenting him, and due to these acts of the respondent, it has become impossible for him to continue matrimonial life with her. It is stated that in the event the appellant continues to reside with the respondent, his life would be in danger and he would be compelled to live under constant fear and mental stress. It is further stated that the appellant and the respondent have been residing separately since September 2018 and during this entire period there has been no cohabitation or marital relationship between them. In totality it is the case of the appellant that the respondent has deserted and treated him with cruelty. 5. While replying to the averments made by the appellant, the respondent has denied that she used to remain engaged in telephonic conversations with her male friends and that whenever questioned by the appellant, she used to quarrel with him. It is further denied that she was stubborn, adamant or ill-mannered in nature or that she desired to live according to her own wishes. She has further denied that the appellant became mentally disturbed or harassed because of her conduct. It is also denied that she lodged any false complaint at the Women Police Station to harass the appellant or that his health deteriorated due to any of her acts. She has further denied that she left the matrimonial home with both the children along with all her belongings and never returned thereafter. It is also specifically denied that she had 4 been residing with another man. It is denied that she did not take care of the appellant when his health was in serious condition, or that she assaulted the persons taking care for the appellant or took away his mobile phone and keys of the house. It is also specifically denied by the respondent that on 25.06.2023 she came along with both sons and some outsiders and assaulted the appellant, the domestic help working at his residence, or threatened to kill the appellant. It is specifically denied that the respondent suffered from insomnia and used to consume the sleeping pills. It is further denied that after a quarrel with the appellant she consumed excessive sleeping pills and thereafter falsely implicated him of administering the pills to kill her. 6. By way of additional submissions, it is stated that the appellant and the respondent belong to different religions. The appellant is a follower of Christianity whereas the respondent is a follower of Hinduism. The appellant is alleged to have trapped the respondent in a love affair and induced her into marriage by showing false dreams and promises. However, from the very second day of marriage, he started harassing her for dowry and pressurized her to bring money from her parents for construction of a house. It is stated that due to compulsion, her parents paid a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- in cash to the appellant for the said purpose but even thereafter there was no change in the conduct of the appellant. It is stated that the appellant is a habitual drunkard and a man of immoral character, which was concealed from her at the time of marriage. It is stated that after marriage, the appellant used to assault her under the influence of liquor and also forced her into unnatural physical relations. It is also stated that the mother of the appellant also treated the respondent like a servant and compelled her to perform household work throughout the day, and thus they continuously subjected her to cruelty and harassment. It is stated that although the appellant is a government servant, he never provided timely financial support to her for household expenses, instead, he spent his entire salary on alcohol and other women. It is stated that despite enduring all this cruelty at the hands of her alcoholic husband, she gave birth to two 5 sons, however, there was no improvement in his behaviour. It is stated that the appellant continued to assault, abuse and harass her being under the influence of liquor. It is further stated that due to cruelty, harassment and atrocities committed by the appellant she tried to work outside the home for the maintenance of herself and her children but the appellant never permitted her for that nor did he provide any financial support for their maintenance. It is stated that despite her being present in the house, the appellant used to bring different women and establish physical relations with them in her presence. It is alleged that the appellant also threatened her saying, “If you try to come in my way, I will kill you.” 7. It is stated by the respondent that being a follower of Hinduism, she was subjected to religious harassment by the appellant and his mother and that they both objected to her wearing Mangalsutra, applying sindoor, wearing sarees, and following Hindu customs. They are also alleged to have compelled her to visit church instead of temples and also forced her to read the Bible instead of Hindu scriptures. It is stated that the parents and relatives of the respondent also kept the appellant in their houses. When the appellant suffered COVID-19, the respondent, without caring for her own life, had taken proper care of him, but despite all that, there was no change in his behaviour kept her like a slave. It is further stated that despite all these adversities, she with the support of her parents raised her children properly and completed her studies in law. After the appellant came to know about her pursuing studies in law, he became even more discriminatory and abusive towards her and used filthy and derogatory language such as: “You prostitute, you may become a lawyer or even a judge, but you cannot do anything against me; you will always remain under my feet.” 8. On the basis of the pleadings of the respective parties, learned Family Court framed the following issues:- (I) Whether after solemnization of marriage the appellant has treated the respondent with cruelty? (ii) Whether the appellant is entitled to get the decree of divorce from the respondent? 6 (iii) Relief and cost? 9. In order to prove the case, the appellant apart from himself has examined one Subhasini Meshram AW-2 whereas the respondent hasexamined herself as NAW -1. 10. After appreciating the evidence of the witnesses learned Family Court held the issue No. 1 regarding cruelty on the part of the respondent towards the appellant as not proved. Further, the issue No.2 (wrongly mentioned as issue No. 3) whether the appellant is entitled to get the decree of divorce from the respondent has been held to be in negative. And as regards the issue pertaining to relief and cost, learned Family Court has dismissed the application of the appellant for dissolution of marriage filed under Section 13 (1) of the Act of 1955 by the order impugned. Hence this appeal. 11. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Family Court has ignored the material available on record and has erroneously dismissed the application for dissolution of marriage. He submits that the respondent was living in desertion for a long time and also in adultery with her boy friend, but it has not been considered by leaned Family Court while rejecting the application filed by the appellant under Section 13 (1) of the Act of 1955. He submits that learned Family Court ought to have considered the fact that there was an agreement executed on 30.04.2018 where the respondent had expressed her intention to live separately and the same was executed in the garb of filing false compliant against the appellant which shows that the respondent was willing to live in adulterous relationship by deserting her husband. He submits that the learned Family Court committed an error of law holding that the appellant failed to prove his case of dissolution of marriage. He further submits that the findings recorded by learned Family Court are not based on facts and circumstances of the case. According to him, the conclusion of dismissal of the application for dissolution of marriage has wrongly been drawn by the leaned Family Judge on the basis of erroneous appreciation of evidence, and being so the impugned judgment is liable to be set 7 aside. 12. Despite service, there is no representation on behalf of the respondent. 13. Heard counsel for the appellant and perused the documents on record including the judgment impugned. 14. From the evidence available on record it is apparent that though the appellant has made several allegations against the respondent like that of having deserted him for quite longe time and also of living in adultery with her boyfriend, but he has not filed any document to establish the same. On the contrary, there is an admission on the part of the appellant that whenever the respondent talked to her colleagues, he used to pick up dispute with her. The appellant has further admitted that he insisted the respondent to let him talk to the person she was conversing with on phone, but she used to delete the concerned contact number from her mobile set. He has further admitted that the act of respondent having conversation with her colleges on mobile phone made him nurture a suspicion against her. There is also an admission on the part of the appellant that he was in the habit of having liquor since 2005 and for that his liver and kidney got damaged. The appellant has stated that the photographs produced by him in the case were taken as screen shot from the mobile of someone else. He has further admitted that the said photographs were the computer prints. However, no certificate as provided under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act has been produced on record. The appellant in his evidence has made almost similar assertions in the line of the pleadings. However, in cross examination he admits that he follows Christianity. He has admitted that before marriage the respondent had disclosed to him about prosecuting the studies in law and that he had consented also for that. He has further admitted that when the respondent started going to college for studying law, he had objected to that. He had asked her to give up legal profession, and take care of the children instead. The appellant has further admitted that while pursuing studies, the colleagues essentially have telephonic conversation, but when the respondent conversed anyone on phone, there used to be disputes between them. When the appellant persisted the 8 respondent to let him talk to the person she was talking to, she used to delete his number from the call history. He has admitted that he used to suspect her when she talked to someone on mobile. He has further admitted that on account of excessive consumption of liquor by him, the respondent used to pick up dispute with him, and she always asked him to give it up. He has admitted that after he had liver ailment in the year 2021, he lived in the house of parents of the respondent for 2-3 months where they had well take care of him. 15. The other witness examined by the appellant is Subhasini Meshram (AW-2) and she too has stated in the same terms as by appellant himself. She too has admitted that the appellant used to have heavy liquor consumption and for that his liver and kidney had got damaged. She has expressed her ignorance as to for what there used to be disputes between the appellant and the respondent. 16. Respondent has examined herself as NAW-1 and stated that for a few months she is living separately from the appellant. She has further stated that marital relations used to be established between her and the appellant off and on. She has stated that she was not aware of the fact that the appellant was following Christianity before marriage. She has denied of living separately from the appellant, rather it is the appellant who had driven her out of the house. She has admitted that on 30.04.2018 an agreement for dissolution of marriage was executed between her and the appellant, but denied that since the execution of said agreement they are living separately. 17. Having thus gone through the material on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that though number of allegations have been made against the appellant yet the respondent/wife has not been able to prove the same by adducing any cogent and clinching evidence in this regard. The material on record revealed that on account of excessive consumption of liquor, the liver and kidney of the appellant got damaged and the respondent used to ask the appellant not to consume liquor. Record also reveals that during the treatment of liver and kidney ailment, the appellant used to live with the parents of the respondent, and that one 9 Deepa Yadav worked as maid in the house of the appellant, in the wake of which some dispute had erupted between the appellant and the respondent. Many the allegations may be against the the respondent in this case but in the midst of all these, the element of cruelty at the hands of respondent/wife appear to be totally amiss entailing the grant of decree of divorce in favour of the appellant/husband. Accordingly, the approach of learned Family Court in rejecting the plea of dissolution of marriage cannot be said to be faulted with. Being that, the impugned judgment and decree appear to be based on just and proper appreciation of the evidence on record and warrant no interference in this appeal. Appeal being devoid of any merit is therefore liable to be dismissed. It is dismissed as such but without any cost. Let decree be drawn accordingly. Sd/- Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge Judge Jyotishi AVANISH JYOTISHI Digitally signed by AVANISH JYOTISHI Date: 2026.05.18 16:26:24 +0530