5 min readNew DelhiJul 23, 2026 04:55 PM IST
The Jharkhand High Court has said that a wife suffering from “some health issues” cannot become a ground for divorce and upheld an order refusing divorce to a man who claimed his wife was mentally ill and deserted him.
Justices Sujit Narayan Prasad and Sanjay Prasad were of the view that the husband had himself “dismantled” the matrimonial home as he had left the wife at her home and refused to take her back.
“Life is made up of good times and bad, and the bad times can bring with it terrible illnesses and extreme hardships. The partners in a marriage must weather these storms and embrace the sunshine with equanimity. Any person may have bad health; this is not their fault, and most times, it is not within their control,” the July 21 order read.
The couple married on January 30, 2015, following which the husband claimed that he noticed that his wife was suffering from a mental health disorder and did not understand a man and wife “relationship”.
Justices Sujit Narayan Prasad and Sanjay Prasad observed that the husband made no efforts to “restore” the wife to the matrimonial home.
According to the husband, the wife was suffering from a “chronic” and “incurable” mental disorder and was not fit to lead a married life. The husband claimed that when he informed his in-laws about the physical and mental condition of the wife, they came to his house in anger, threatened him, and returned.
The husband alleged the marriage was performed by hiding important facts from him. Further, he also claimed that he took his wife to a psychiatrist and at different places such as Bangalore, Gaya, Ranchi, Jamshedpur, and Durgapur, where she was medically examined by various specialist doctors, but as per the doctors, the disease was incurable. The husband then filed for divorce in the family court on the grounds of desertion and mental disorder.
Before the family court, it was claimed by the wife that after the marriage, they were living together happily for a period of three months, but later on, her husband and his family members started demanding additional dowry from her. The wife contended to ensure that she led a peaceful life, her father deposited Rs 1 lakh in the account of her husband.
Story continues below this ad
The wife further alleged that the in-laws then started to demand further dowry and when it was not fulfilled, then she was physically and mentally assaulted. It also came on record that the husband left the wife at her home on July 10, 2017, and never tried to bring her back. After evaluation the evidence and the arguments, the family court judge refused to grant a divorce to the couple. The husband then approached the high court against the order of the family court.
‘Dismantled matrimonial home’
The high court stated that, as per law, desertion was continuous event and as a reason for divorce, there must be ‘desertion’ at least for two years before a case was filed for obtaining divorce. The court noted that the wife lived with the husband in her matrimonial home for two and a half years and that the husband had himself left the wife at her home. The court was of the view, “it was the husband who dismantled the matrimonial home, and therefore, he cannot take advantage of his own wrong”.
The court observed that during the family court proceedings, the wife had expressed her “readiness” and “willingness” to resume the relation, but the husband had refused to take her back without any valid reason. Therefore, the high court held that it was the husband who had ‘withdrawn’ from the wife without any just cause.
On the allegation of mental disorder, the high court noted that the husband had neither produced any convincing evidence nor had he called any doctor or any staff of a hospital to support the allegation of the wife being mentally ill and that he had “ample” opportunity to interact with the wife before the marriage and had married her upon his satisfaction. The court also pointed that if indeed the wife had any health problems, the husband should have taken her to a doctor.
Story continues below this ad
Accordingly, the court held that the grounds of mental illness and desertion raised by the husband were without any “concrete” evidence and that the family court had rightly decided the case.
‘Illegal allegations’
Advocate Arvind Kumar Choudhary, appearing for the husband, argued that the family court did not consider the evidence where it could be clearly understood that the husband had been subjected to cruelty by the wife because of her abnormal behaviour.
Advocate Shailendra Jit, appearing for the wife, urged that there the family court had rightly dismissed the case and the allegations of the husband were “absolutely illegal” and “uncalled” for. The counsel also pointed out that the family court had observed that the conduct of the husband had never been towards “salvaging” the marriage.
