Nagpur: In a city bustling with heavy traffic and loads of communication tools, the infidelity too is fast gaining roots into marriages. In a peculiar case that came up at the Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court, a married man was denied divorce by the court holding that he can’t stay with his childhood female friend under one roof.
“A man would surely not stay with his childhood friend in one house under one roof after separating with his wife, before his marriage is dissolved. If the husband was living with another woman in her house only as a friend or as a tenant, he could have surely come up with explanation, particularly when his wife clearly pleaded that he had an illicit relationship with his schoolmate,” the division bench comprising justices Vasanti Naik and AD Upadhye said.
While upholding Nagpur family court’s verdict, the judges pointed out that it was necessary for the husband to explain why and in what capacity he was residing with his schoolmate in her house.
“The other woman lost her husband and was living with her son in Nagpur. As per the husband’s own admission, he was also living with her for about 17-18 months under one roof. It was necessary to believe wife’s case that the husband had an illicit relationship with his childhood friend. Had it not been so, the husband would have explained his relationship with the schoolmate and the reason to live with her,” they added.
The couple was in love since college days and entered into a wedlock on April 9, 2011. Two daughters were born out of their wedlock before they decided to live separately citing irreconcilable differences.
Subsequently, the husband knocked the family court’s doors for divorce citing wife’s erratic behaviour and her refusal to maintain physical relationship with him. He claimed that she always used to suspect his character and accused him of having an extramarital affair with his childhood flame.
Denying his allegations, the wife pleaded that after he was transferred to Nagpur in 2012, he started residing with his schoolmate and later developed an illicit relationship.
On November 30, 2015, the lower court rejected his plea holding that there was reason for the wife to suspect her husband’s character and he cannot be permitted to take advantage of his own wrong.
After his case came up for hearing in the high court, the judges observed that he utterly failed to prove that his wife treated him with cruelty. They raised doubts on the man’s character after he admitted that he was driven out of the house by his parents, who were residing in the city.
“If the character or behaviour of husband was good, we doubt as to why his parents would drive him out. Though the husband has denied that he was driven out of the house in view of his illicit relationship, the fact remains that his behaviour was such that his parents were not ready to live with him under one roof,” the court noted.