The division bench of Justice AM Shaffique and Justice P Somarajan made this observation while granting a divorce to a 70-year-old man whose plea was denied by a family court.
The Hush Post: Humiliating and insulting the husband before his close friends, relatives and colleagues and challenging his dignity amounts to cruelty, the Kerala High Court has observed.
The division bench of Justice AM Shaffique and Justice P. Somarajan made this observation while granting a divorce to a 70-year-old man whose plea was denied by a family court. “Ridiculing the husband among his close friends, relatives and also before the officials wherein he was working and challenging his dignity amounts to cruelty in all means,” the court observed.
The petitioner, VV Prabhakaran, had produced evidence in the family court claiming that he was subjected to continuous mental cruelty and his dignity was challenged among his friends, relatives, subordinate officers and higher officials. He had told the family court that his wife, T Chandramathi, had preferred a complaint against him under Section 498 A of the IPC, but was later settled out of court. Besides, he had said that he wasn’t invited by his wife to the marriage of his daughter. He was, however, denied divorce by the family court.
The bench said, “The pain and suffering meted out by the petitioner on registration of a crime against him by the concerned police can very well discern from the fact that it was registered while he was at the age of 70 years. He was not permitted to participate in the marriage of his one and the only daughter, PW7. He has been ridiculed before his officials, friends and relatives is well evident from the various complaints and letters issued at various occasions. The extent of cruelty is well evident from the nature of wild allegations levelled against him in those complaints and letters. As discussed earlier, ridiculing the husband before his friends, officials and relatives and challenging his dignity by his wife amounts to mental cruelty having far-reaching effects. This cannot be condoned on a later point of time as it will remain in the mind of the petitioner as an incurable injury,” reported LiveLaw.in.