Madhusudhan Innani vs Smt. Jai Shree on 13 April, 2017

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1305 / 2014

Madhusudhan Innani S/o Sh. Sheshnarayan Innani, Resident of 66

Salkiya School Road, Block-B, 5 Tala Howrah (West Bangal)

—-Appellant

Versus

Smt. Jai Shree Innani W/o Madhusudhan Innani, Resident of Near

Shivalay, Napasar, District Bikaner

—-Respondent

__
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Pankaj Gupta
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Saurabh Maheshwari, on behalf of Mr.
Ramit Mehta
__
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Judgment
13/04/2017

This appeal is preferred to question correctness of the

judgment dated 15.07.2014 passed by the Family Court, Bikaner

granting a decree of divorce to annual the marriage between the

parties taken place on 22.06.2004 at Calcutta. Learned Family

Court after examining the entire material available on record

arrived at the conclusion that the cruelty extended by the

appellant-respondent is sufficient to annul the marriage and also

to reject an application preferred under Section 9 of the Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 by him.

(2 of 3)
[CMA-1305/2014]

Learned Family Court while arriving at the conclusion

as above relied upon a definite statement made by Ms. Jai Shree

Innani (A.W.1), who in quite specific terms stated that the

appellant was a habitual drunkard and he used to beat her with

belt and otherwise too. An FIR too was also lodged at the police

station concerned on basis of the details extended by Mrs. Jai

Shree relating to the alleged criminal act. A case under Section

498-A read with Section 406 IPC was also lodged and therein the

READ  Mukesh & Anr vs State For Nct Of Delhi & Ors on 5 May, 2017

appellant-respondent was arrested. In the case aforesaid, the

appellant-respondent was convicted by the court competent.

The discussion made by the trial court while arriving at

the conclusion about extension of cruelty reads as follows :-

“t;Jh us vizkFkhZ e/kqlwnu }kjk ‘kjkc ihus vkSj mlds ckn
ekjihV djus] csYV ls ekjus vkSj vlkekU; O;ogkj djus]
cky idM+dj nhokj ls ekjus ds d`R; djuk crk;k gSA
vizkFkhZ e/kqlwnu izkFkhZuh t;Jh dks Hk;Hkhr j[krk Fkk] xkyh
xykSp djrk Fkk] vkSj viuh fo/kok eklh lqeu ds ?kj pyk
tkrk FkkA vizkFkhZ vR;Ur Øks/kh LoHkko dk O;fDr gSA fnukad
20-07-2006 dks vizkFkhZ us izkFkhZuh dks /kDdk nsdj ?kj ls
ckgj fudky fn;kA fnukad 08-07-2007 dks iapk;r Hkh
cqykbZ xbZ ysfdu dksbZ ifj.kke ugha fudyk vkSj blh
Øwjrkiw.kZ dk;Z ls rax gksdj iz-lw-fj- la- 107@2007 ntZ
djokbZ] bl laca/k esa izn’kZ 1 nLrkost egRoiw.kZ gSA ;g
lgh gS fd blesa n-iz-la- dh /kkjk 169 ds vraxZr fjgkbZ
nsus ds laca/k es fuosnu fd;k x;k gS] ysfdu fjgkbZ gsrq
vkosnu ek ls gh ;g fu’p;kRed fu”d”kZ ugha fn;k tk
ldrk fd Øwjrk dk dksbZ d`R; izkFkhZuh ds lkFk ugha gqvkA
vizkFkhZ e/kqlwnu dks /kkjk 498,] 406 Hkk-n-la- ds varxZr
vuqla/kku gksus ds ckn fxj¶rkj fd;k x;k blls ;gha Li”B
gksrk gS fd vuqla/kku ls bu vkjksiksa ds izFke n`”V;k rRo
izekf.kr gq, gSA ;g vyx rF; gS fd ,Q-vkj- bl dkj.k
ls nsus gsrq fuosnu fd;k x;k fd fnukad 22-06-2004 dks
e/kqlwnu dydRrk ¼gkoM+k½ esa gksuk ik;k x;k FkkA izfrijh{kk
(3 of 3)
[CMA-1305/2014]

ds nkSjku izkFkhZuh t;Jh us ;g Lohdkj fd;k gS fd eSusa
iqfyl Fkkuk dydRrk esa f’kdk;r ugha dh lkspk fd vizkFkhZ
lq/kj tk;sxsaA izFke ckj fnlEcj ekg esa eSaus ihgj esa
llqjky i{k dh f’kdk;r dh] llwjky okys ?kj ls ugha
fudyus nsrs Fks] vkSj ekjihV ls esjs ‘kjhj esa txgtxg
pksVs vkbZ ftUgsa MkWDVj dks ugha fn[kkus fn;kA esjs HkkbZ
llqjky vk;s rc mUgksaus ns[kk] eSus Nqikus dh dksf’k’k dh
ysfdu mUgsa irk yx x;kA vkxs iapk;r ukxkSj esa gqbZ
blls igys uks[kk esa Hkh gqbZ vkSj mlesa vizkFkhZ e/kqlwnu us
dgk fd eSa ekjihV ugha d:axk] nqO;Zogkj ugha d:axk
ysfdu eSa vizkFkhZ e/kqlwnu ds lkFk blfy;s ugha xbZ D;ksafd
mUgksaus ,dkUr esa mlls dgk fd xqLlk vkus ij dHkh Hkh
esjs gkFk mB ldrs gS] rqEgsa ekj ldrk gWaw vkSj eqs
fudkyus ds ckn 11 ekg rd dydRrk esa jgh mlds ckn
ukiklj vk xbZA vizkFkhZ us esjs lkFk bruh ekjihV dh gS
fd vc eSa mlds lkFk jgus ds fy;s rS;kj ugha gwaA bl
izdkj ,-M-1 t;Jh dh lk{; ls Li”V gS fd vizkFkhZ
e/kqlwnu us t;Jh ds lkFk ‘kkjhfjd ,oa ekufld Øwjrk dk
O;ogkj fd;k gS vkSj oSokfgd drZO;ksa dk fuoZgu ugha fd;k
blfy;s vizkFkhZ dh nkEiR; vf/kdkjksa dh iquZLFkkiuk dh
izkFkZuk Lohdkj fd;s tkus ;ksX; ugha gSA”

In view of whatever stated above and also looking to

READ  Jairam Yadav vs State Of Bihar & Anr on 7 April, 2017

the fact that respondent-applicant Mrs. Jai Shree has already

entered into re-wedlock, we do not find any merit in this appeal.

Dismissed, accordingly.

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR)J. (GOVIND MATHUR)J.

Pramod

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *