Husband’s love became overwhelming…
In a very important decision, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has made it clear that if a husband, despite being married to his wife, remains in a ‘live-in relationship’ with another woman and also fathers a child with her, then it is extreme ‘cruelty’ towards his wife. The court gave this decision while rejecting the divorce petition filed by a husband. The husband had accused his wife, who had been separated from him 30 years ago, of desertion and cruelty. But the court found that the husband’s own conduct had forced the wife to live separately. Now the court has asked the husband to pay compensation and ‘alimony’.
What happened 30 years ago?
This case begins about three decades ago. On May 30, 1993, a couple got married as per Hindu rituals in Shimla. But this relationship did not last long and from January 1994, both of them started living separately. Years later, the husband filed a divorce petition in the court.
The husband alleged that his wife left him without any concrete reason. The husband argued that since his wife had grown up in a city like Shimla, she was not able to adjust herself in his small town ‘Tattapani’. The husband also claimed that he tried hard to bring his wife back by going with his relatives and Panchayat officials, but the wife flatly refused to live with him.
Whereas the wife’s story was completely different. The wife said that the husband himself had left her at her maternal home in Shimla and never came to take her back. According to the wife, she tried to go back to her in-laws’ house through her relatives, even her sister and brother-in-law, but the husband refused to keep her in the house and married another woman.
Husband leaves wife and sets up ‘second family’
Records show how difficult this time was for the wife. His mother, who was his sole support, died on 10 August 2001. The wife had no source of income. She tried many times to get a job, but could not succeed. On the other hand, her husband was running a successful business in his own name in Tattapani.
Frustrated, the wife lodged a complaint with the Himachal Pradesh Women’s Commission on November 27, 2001. She told how her husband left her in Shimla in 1994 and never heard from her again. She also told that the husband has remarried without divorcing her.
The wife demanded the return of her jewellery, household items and maintenance allowance. In 2002, both the parties agreed to return the goods, but the husband never returned the goods nor did the wife go to Tattapani to collect the goods with police protection.
After this, on July 3, 2003, the wife filed a petition in the court under Section 125 of Cr.PC for maintenance. In 2006, the court ruled in favor of the wife and ordered the husband to pay alimony of Rs 3,000 per month. The husband challenged this decision before the Sessions Judge, but his petition was rejected on April 10, 2007. Even after this the husband did not agree and filed a petition in the High Court.
Such open secrets in the court
In the petition filed by the husband for divorce, he accused the wife of cruelty and abandonment. On behalf of the husband, his brother and the head of the Gram Panchayat also testified.
But a major turning point in this matter came when the old documents of the maintenance proceedings were seen. In response to the maintenance petition (2003), the husband had made serious allegations against the wife like having “illicit relations in Shimla”. However, the husband could never prove this allegation. The High Court held that a husband making such a false and serious allegation against his wife was cruelty in itself, and was a sufficient reason for the wife to live separately.
The biggest evidence that went against the husband was his own ‘second family’. The court found that on March 5, 1996, the husband had a daughter from another woman. This was strong evidence that the husband had been living in a live-in relationship with another woman soon after his separation from his wife (at least since 1995), even if he had not formally married her.
High Court accepted husband’s cruelty
On September 23, 2025, Himachal Pradesh High Court gave a historic verdict rejecting the husband’s divorce appeal.
The husband’s lawyer argued that the wife herself had told the court that she no longer wanted to live with her husband. On this the court said that the wife’s statement should be seen in its full context. The wife said this because the husband is already married to another woman and also has a child.
The High Court clearly stated: The parties have been living separately since January 1994 and the birth of a daughter in 1996 clearly shows that the husband was either already in a relationship or entered into the relationship later. This fact was a sufficient and strong ground for the wife to live separately from her husband. Under no circumstances can this be considered abandonment or cruelty on the part of the wife. “Rather, it is the husband himself whose cruelty forced the wife to live separately.”