There may be some hope for men, or possibly also because of men rights activism that courts are becoming sensitive to men facing cruelty in marriages. Following news is about a Delhi court judgment.
Read my maintenance book (DV and CrPC 125) if you want to save HARD EARNED money. Use coupon code MenToo to get 52% discount and help it win Sales Contest to promote #MenToo awareness. (Kindle eBook version) (Print Paperback version)
Download my free PDF eBook Surviving the Legal Jungle
Don't be a lone ranger... JOIN our Facebook group to connect
Read this FREE eBook written by fathers involved in child custody issues(PDF book)
Permitting a man to divorce his wife who willfully neglected him for nearly
five years, a city court said such a desertion without any reason amounted
The woman had left her hus- band a year after the marriage.
Additional District Judge M.K. Nagpal declined the woman’s plea for re-union
say- ing the expression of such a desire at the last minute is of no
consequence, as it cannot be ignored that a period of more than 5 years has
passed since their separation.
Laviral Kalra (name changed), a resident of Hari Nagar, married Aashi (name
changed) in November 2000.
Kalra alleged his wife deserted him a year after their marriage and refused
to live with him.
Prabhjit Jauhar, counsel for Kalra, submitted in court: “Mandatory two years
of deser- tion period got over. Now she wants to re-join the company of her
husband. It’s merely an eye wash.”
The court noted that Kalra was never accused of any wrong doing leading to
sepa- ration with his wife.
“The woman has not filed any police complaint till date alleging any
criminal acts or cruelties on the part of the peti- tioner (husband) or any
of his family members, nor she had ever initiated any legal steps to rejoin
her matrimony,” said the judge.
Jauhar said Kalra was enti- tled to divorce because of cru- elty and
desertion committed by his wife under the Hindu Marriage Act.
Aashi, in person, said she was willing to join her husband and the court
should not dissolve the marriage.
The court noted that there was sufficient material on record stating that
Kalra tried to mend the differences but his wife refused to respond.
The court ordered immedi- ate dissolution of the couple’s marriage.