New Delhi, Jan 9: Attempting suicide and then trying to put the blame on the husband and his family members is an act of extreme cruelty by the wife, the Delhi High Court said on Tuesday.

A bench headed by Justice Suresh Kumar Kait observed that in such instances, the family remains under the constant threat of being implicated in false cases and the Supreme Court has also held that repeated threats to commit suicide or attempting to commit suicide amounts to cruelty.

The high court passed the order while upholding a family court order granting divorce to a man on the ground of cruelty by his wife.

The bench, also comprising Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, noted that the marriage between the couple was troubled from the beginning and the wife even consumed a mosquito repellent liquid in an attempt to commit suicide but later, tried to wriggle out of the situation by claiming that she was compelled to do it.

The woman alleged that since she was not being provided with a proper diet, she was administered the liquid by the husband on the pretext of it being a nutritious tonic, the court recorded, adding that she, however, subsequently accepted that her husband was at his place of work at the time of the incident.

"Such conduct of the appellant in attempting suicide and then trying to put the blame on the husband and his family members was an act of extreme cruelty as the family remained under the constant threat of being implicated in false cases," the court said.

"The repeated threats to commit suicide and an attempt to commit suicide were held to be an action amounting to cruelty by the Supreme court.... (In another case,) it was observed (by the top court) that in case the wife succeeds in committing suicide, one can only imagine how the poor husband would get entangled into the clutches of law, which would virtually ruin his sanity, peace of mind, career and probably his entire life. Such a threat of attempting suicide amounts to cruelty," the court added.

It further said although the wife has a legal right to take recourse for any wrong, making unsubstantiated allegations of having been subjected to dowry demands or acts of cruelty by the husband or his family members and getting criminal trials initiated against them are also "clearly acts of cruelty".

"We note that during the two years of their matrimonial life, the parties barely resided together for 10 months in all and even during that time, there were various acts of cruelty of being subjected to false complaints and civil as well as criminal litigation committed by the appellant (wife) towards the respondent," the court said.

"We, therefore, conclude that the learned additional principal judge of the family court has rightly held that the respondent was subjected to cruelty by the appellant and granted divorce under section 13(1)(ia) of the HMA (Hindu Marriage Act). We find no merit in the appeal, which along with the pending applications, if any, is hereby dismissed," the court ordered.

Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.



Chennai: Journalist and political commentator Sujit Nair has expressed concern over speculation that the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and the All India Anna Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam could explore a post-poll understanding to prevent Vijay-led Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam from forming the government in Tamil Nadu.

In a social media post, Sujit Nair said the election verdict in Tamil Nadu reflected a clear public demand for political change and argued that the mandate should be respected irrespective of political preferences.

Referring to reports and political discussions surrounding a possible understanding between the DMK and AIADMK, he said he hoped such developments remained only speculative conversations and did not turn into reality.

Nair stated that if such an alliance were to take shape, it would raise serious questions about ideological politics in the country. He said TVK had emerged through a democratic electoral process and that the legitimacy to govern in a parliamentary democracy comes from the people’s verdict.

According to him, attempts to prevent an electoral winner from forming the government through unexpected political arrangements may be constitutionally valid, but many people could view them as politically opportunistic.

He further said that such a move could particularly affect the political image of the DMK, which has historically projected itself around ideology, social justice and opposition politics. Nair said that in ideological terms, the DMK appeared closer to TVK than to the AIADMK, and joining hands with its long-time political rival only to remain in power could weaken its broader political narrative.

He added that the same questions would apply to the AIADMK as well, as the party had spent decades positioning itself against the DMK and such an arrangement could create discomfort among its cadre and supporters.

Drawing a comparison with Maharashtra politics in 2019, Nair said he had expressed similar views when the Shiv Sena formed an alliance with the Indian National Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party after the Assembly elections.

He said post-poll alliances between long-standing political rivals often create a public perception that ideology and electoral mandates become secondary when political power equations come into play.

Nair also said such developments increase public cynicism towards politics and reinforce the belief among voters that ideology is often sidelined after elections.

He maintained that the Tamil Nadu verdict was emphatic and said respecting both the spirit and substance of the mandate was important for the credibility of democratic politics.