- (1.) THIS is an appeal by a young wife against her husband seeking divorce and in the alternative judicial separation. The marriage of the appellant with the respondent took place on 13th May, 1969 in accordance with Hindu Law and custom. She came to reside with the respondent at his house in village Bhadora on 14th May, 1969 and lived with him till 19th May, 1969 when she returned to her father's place. Thereafter she again lived with her husband from 12th June, 1969 to 22nd July, 1969. Again, she lived with him for some time till 22nd November, 1969. She went to Anupshahr to attend the marriage of the son of Bishan Swarup and returned to her father's place on 13th May, 1969 (?) and since then she has been residing with her father. Her allegations against the respondent were that he ill-treated her, called her ugly and black and also accused her of unchastity. He caused physical injuries to her, gave her beating off and on and once sprinkled kerosene oil on her and tried to burn her. She also alleged that the respondent had illicit connections with other ladies and when she objected to the same she was mercilessly beaten and abused and called unchaste and was threatened that her nose would be chopped off and she would be killed. Persistent arid repeated ill-treatment by the respondent made her believe that if she would live with him she would be killed. The cruel behaviour of the respondent inflicting physical and mental torture on her has left an impact on her mind that it would be injurious and harmful to her if she would live with him as his wife. She, therefore, filed a petition under Sections 10 and 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for the aforementioned reliefs. The petition was contested by the respondent denying the allegations made against him
(2.) THE trial court, on a consideration of the evidence on the record recorded a finding that the petitioner had failed to prove that the respondent was living in adultery. It, however, held that the false accusation against the chastity of the petitioner amounted to cruelty and that the evidence on the record established that the petitioner was treated with cruelty by the respondent, that she was beaten and was threatened and that she was called unchaste. It, therefore, recorded a finding that the respondent treated the petitioner with cruelty both physical and mental. The accusation of unchastity amounted to mental cruelty and it gave reasonable apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that it would be quite harmful and injurious for her to live with the respondent. On these findings the trial court granted a decree of divorce to the petitioner. Against that decision an appeal was preferred by the present respondent Sri Krishna Swarup. The learned District Judge, who heard the appeal, concurred with the trial court that it was not proved that the husband, who is the respondent before me lived in adultery. As a consequence of this finding the learned District Judge further held that Krishan Swarup had, therefore, no occasion for subjecting his wife to any mental or physical torture. Disagreeing with the trial court he, therefore, held that in the instant case the wife was not ill-treated by the husband. Dealing with the grievance that the respondent had falsely accused his wife of unchastity the learned District Judge held that he did not accuse her of unchastity. The learned District Judge, therefore, allowed the appeal and set aside the decree passed by the trial court. Aggrieved, the petitioner has come up to this Court in second appeal. For the appellant it was urged that the appellate court below had erred in holding that she was not physically and mentally tortured by the respondent and that the respondent had not accused her of unchastity. It was submitted that the finding of the appellate court below was perverse and at any rate it was based on misconstruction of the evidence on record. It was urged that the grievance that the respondent had accused the appellant of unchastity was proved by oral and documentary evidence on the record. The appellant had deposed on oath that she was repeatedly maligned as unchaste by the respondent. Her statement it was urged, found support from a letter Ex. 5 dated 2nd August, 1969 sent by the appellant's father to Sunder Lal as also from Ex. 1 which is a notice given by the respondent to the father of the appellant on 24th November, 1969. I was taken through the evidence on the record. The appellant had asserted in her petition that she was repeatedly accused of being unchaste by the respondent and was tortured by him. She was very often beaten, was called ugly and black and was also threatened that her nose would be chopped off and she would be killed. She had also alleged that the respondent had once sprinkled kerosene oil on her body and tried to burn her but luckily she was saved. She examined herself in the case to support her averments made in the petition. It appears from Ex. 5 that the appellant was maligned as unchaste. Even in the notice Ex. 1 an accusation was made that the appellant was unchaste. This notice was given by the respondent to the father of the appellant informing him that the respondent would reach the house of the addressee to fetch the appellant and that if she would not be sent with him he would take legal action. The contents of that notice are typed in Hindi letters. At the foot of the notice it is stated that initial letters in line 12 thereof were scored. Similarly one word in line 7 was scored. It is signed by the respondent. A sentence was, however, written in that notice in ink. That sentence is very material and needs to be reproduced. It reads : "Halan ki uske badchalan hote huye bhi mai usko lane ko tayyar hun." That sentence was, however, scored out by drawing a straight line over it. But despite that it can be very easily read out. This document was admitted by the respondent. It is not the case of the respondent that the aforesaid sentence written in ink in the said letter was not added by him. The trial court while coming to the conclusion that the respondent had accused the appellant of being unchaste relied on this document as well. The learned District Judge, who heard the appeal, however, did not place reliance on that sentence in Ex. 1. The learned District Judge observed : "The hand-written contents read that in spite of her bad character (chal chalan) he was prepared to bring her along with him. This hand-written portion appears to have been scored out by drawing a straight line from one end to the other. Phrase 'chal chalan' without any reference to the context can also mean misbehaviour and not necessarily unchastity. At any rate since this hand-written portion was struck off none is entitled to read it and much less base a finding upon it. Possibility was not ruled out that under extreme despair, worry, and anxiety this sentence was carelessly written and on a second thought its consequences were assessed and at the earliest opportunity, therefore, struck off. Such casual and unmindful remark should not forever mutilate the sacramental ties with which the couple was bound as life partners.
(3.) THE learned District Judge has obviously misread the hand-written portion of the said notice Ex. 1. The respondent had not used the word 'chal chalan' but had used the word 'badchalan'. He had written that despite her being unchaste he was prepared to take her along with him. The word 'badchalan' does not mean misbehaviour. It connotes unchastity. It is true that the hand-written sentence was scored out by drawing a straight line from one end to the other but it was not so scored out as not to be deciphered. The sentence was meant to be read. Otherwise it would either have not been written or it would have been scored in such a way that no one could despite efforts made in that behalf read it. It is a strong circumstance corroborative of the fact that the respondent maligned the appellant of being unchaste. There is truth in the statement of the appellant that the respondent did accuse her of being unchaste. There is no evidence on the record that the said accusation was correct.;