SAMDEEP MOHAN VARGHESE Vs. ANJANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DOES the concept of matrimonial cruelty vary in accordance with the religious persuasions of individuals ? Is a spouse bound to suffer greater amount of matrimonial cruelty because the spouses belong to a religion which considered marriage as indissoluble? Can the secular constitutional republic recognise and accept the existence of different varieties of matrimonial cruelty - Hindu cruelty, Christian cruelty, Muslim cruelty and secular cruelty ? Should not matrimonial cruelty entitling a spouse for divorce yield to a uniform conceptualisation notwithstanding the different semantics employed in different pieces of matrimonial legislations applicable to different religions ? Should not the courts take inspiration from Article 44 of the Constitution and attempt to understand the concept of matrimonial cruelty in a uniform manner to ensure that the right to life under Article 21 is made effective and meaningful under the matrimonial roof and to liberate spouses from a marital life in perpetual fear of contumacious cruelty ? These questions arise before us in these appeals.

(2.) THESE appeals are directed against a common judgment under which three original petitions were disposed of by the Family Court, Ernakulam.

(3.) THE wife examined herself as PW1, her mother as PW2 and her brother in law as PW3. Exts.A1 to A9 were marked on her side. The husband examined himself as RW1 and two friends of his as Rws 2 and 3. Exts.B1 to B10 were marked.