Denial of Motherhood – Amounts to Cruelty

It is well-acknowledged that what constitutes ‘Cruelty’, in a marriage is almost impossible to define. Hon’ble Supreme Court, has in a number of decisions held that ‘cruelty’ in a marriage is to be determined in the facts and circumstances of each case. In this regard, the observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ravi Kumar v. Julmidevi’ (2010) 4 SCC 476, are relevant:

“It may be true that there is no definition of cruelty under the said Act. Actually, such a definition is not possible. In matrimonial relationship, cruelty would obviously mean absence of mutual respect and understanding between the spouses which embitters the relationship and often leads to various outbursts of behaviour which can be termed as cruelty. Sometime cruelty in a matrimonial relationship may take the form of violence, sometime it may take a different form. At times, it may be just an attitude or an approach. Silence in some situations may amount to cruelty.

Therefore, cruelty in matrimonial behaviour defies any definition and its categories can never be closed. Whether the husband is cruel to his wife or the wife is cruel to her husband has to be ascertained and judged by taking into account the entire facts and circumstances of the given case and not by any predetermined rigid formula. Cruelty in matrimonial cases can be of infinite variety-it may be subtle or even brutal and may be by gestures and words. That possibly explains why Lord Denning in Sheldon v. Sheldon, [1966] 2 WLR 993 held that categories of cruelty in matrimonial cases are never closed.” In the present case it is not in dispute that the parties have been living separately since 2015. Further, the list of acrimonious allegations by the appellant against the respondent and his family are endless. Be that as it may, Motherhood is innate, natural, and fulfilling to every woman; and the fact that the appellant was denied the same, and was forced to terminate her pregnancy against her will, at the insistence of the respondent, and thereafter could not conceive again due to gynaecological complications, constitutes cruelty. Renuka v. Shelly Kumar, (2022) 3 HLR 417.