After more than a decade of acrimonious matrimonial litigation marked by criminal complaints, arrests, and failed mediation, the Telangana High Court upheld a decree of divorce on grounds of cruelty. While denying maintenance and permanent alimony to an employed wife, the Court significantly enhanced the minor daughter’s settlement from ₹10 lakhs to INR 80 lakhs - sending a clear message on prolonged litigation, cruelty, and parental responsibility.

A 45-day marriage followed by 12 years of separation led the Telangana High Court to grant divorce, examining concealment of mental illness, non-consummation, and irretrievable breakdown of marriage.

The Telangana High Court held that when a husband’s conduct amounts to cruelty approaching depravity, the law cannot compel the wife to remain in the marriage. Once dignity and safety are compromised, the Court’s duty shifts from preserving the marital bond to protecting the aggrieved spouse.

In this case, the husband alleged that his wife, Mrs. Maya, does not provide food to him, used to threaten him to implicate false charges of dowry against him or his family and often said that she will kill his whole family.   After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, the Supreme Court held that “although the expression of cruelty has not been defined in the Act, it may be physical or mental, direct or indirect. And in this case, the acts of the responden

The judgement in Rani Narasimha Sastry dealt with the complexities surrounding domestic complaints. The Court made it clear that the mere act of filing a complaint, such as one for maintenance or domestic violence, cannot be equated with cruelty unless accompanied by substantive evidence.   However, if a complaint is filed and later found to be baseless or the accused is acquitted, it can be inferred that the filing of the complaint itself might have been used as a tool of ha

In this case, the husband and wife were married in 2012. Domestic issues surfaced when the wife refused to reside in the husband’s matrimonial home. The situation escalated in 2016 when the wife initiated legal proceedings by filing a police case against her husband, his in-laws, and others, accusing them of matrimonial torture and cruelty. In response, the husband filed a petition before the Family Court under Sections 13(1)(i-a) and 13(1)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act. Alt

In India, family disputes often carry a deep emotional and psychological weight. Matters like divorce, child custody, and domestic violence can feel overwhelming, especially for women and children who may already be in vulnerable positions. Family Courts were created to handle these issues with empathy and care, balancing the legal process with the emotional well-being of those involved. Among the most delicate of these cases are those involving child custody . Here, parents

In Rajiv Tayal v. Union of India & Ors. , 124 (2005) DLT 502: 2005 (85) DRJ 146, the Delhi High Court  addressed an important issue concerning the jurisdiction of Indian courts over NRI husbands  who evade legal proceedings initiated by their wives. The case arose when an NRI husband filed a writ petition  challenging the order of the Consulate General of India, New York , which had impounded his passport  under Section 10 of the Passport Act, 1967 , following directions from

In Venkat Perumal v. State of Andhra Pradesh , II (1998) DMC 523, the Andhra Pradesh High Court  dealt with a petition filed by an NRI husband  seeking to quash criminal proceedings initiated by his wife under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)  for matrimonial cruelty. The wife had alleged that she faced harassment, humiliation, and torture  during her short stay with her husband both in Madras and in the United States. When she refused to terminate her pregnancy as