Case – N.G. Dastane v. S. Dastane, 1975
Fact – Mrs. Dastane used to make all sorts of vile, filthy and false allegations, not merely against the husband but also against all the members of the husband’s family. She used to abuse him and his family in the vilest possible terms. Some of the things that she said were; “the pleader’s sanad of that old hag of your father be forfeited”, “I want to see the ruination of the whole Dastane dynasty”, “burn the books written by your father and smear the ashes on your forehead.”
She taunted at her husband, “you are not a man, you are a monster in human body.” She used to threaten him, ‘I will make you lose your job and get it published in the Poona newspapers.” Twice she tore her mangalsutra. After switching on the lights in the night, she used to sit by the side of her husband and nag him. She did many other pranks like these. She was somewhat mentally unbalanced. But the husband suffered.
Issue – Whether the appellant’s consent to the marriage was obtained by fraud or whether the respondent had been of unsound mind for the requisite period preceding the presentation of the petition?
Contentions and Judgement :
- All matrimonial offences can be proved by balance of probability. The degree of proof need not reach certainty, but it must carry a high degree of probability because of the gravity of issue.
- Where the parties, had been quarrelling and litigating for years, the court declined to give relief on the ground that the wife’s alleged act of cruelty had been condoned by the husband. It was further held that section 23(1)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 casts an obligation on the court to consider this question, even when not pleaded and in undefended cases as well.
- The Supreme Court critically examined the matrimonial ground of cruelty as was stated in the old section 10(1)(b) quoted above, and observed that the inquiry in any case covered by that provision had to be whether the conduct charged as cruelty is of such a character as to cause in the mind of the petitioner a reasonable apprehension that it will be harmful or injurious for the petitioner to live with the respondent.
- What was required was that the petitioner must prove that the respondent has treated the petitioner with such cruelty as to cause a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that it will be harmful or injurious for the petitioner to live with the respondent.
- Those who allege the insanity of the respondent at the time of the petition, have the burden cast on them of proving such unsoundness of mind. Being in all cases a question of fact, it must depend upon the facts of each case whether there is satisfactory evidence of the unsoundness of mind of the respondent.
- It was pointed out that as the proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, are of civil nature, the test of criminal proceedings need not be applied and it is not necessary to prove the allegations beyond all reasonable doubt, the reason being that a criminal trial involves the liberty of the subject which may not be taken away on a mere preponderance of probabilities and it would be wrong to input such a consideration into trial of civil nature.
- The word ‘satisfied’ in section 23 of the ‘Act’ must mean satisfied on preponderance of probabilities and not satisfaction beyond reasonable doubt; which requires proof of higher standard in criminal or quasi-criminal trials.
- No precise definition of cruelty has so far been attempted and the courts , have purposely left cruelty undefined. Cruelty may be subtle or brutal, physical or mental. It may be by words, gestures or mere silence.
- The threat given by the wife that she would commit suicide amounted to cruelty.
- The husband continued to suffer prolonged ill-treatment and cruelty from his wife and continued to cohabit with her. A few months before the presentation of the petition for judicial separation on the ground of wife’s cruelty, a child of marriage was born. The Supreme Court observed that continuance of sexual intercourse was evidence of both forgiveness and reconciliation and raised a presumption of condonation.
