Adultery In Divorce Claims Demands Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Patna HC

Setting a strict evidentiary benchmark for matrimonial disputes, the High Court held that allegations of adultery in divorce proceedings cannot rest on mere probabilities and must be conclusively established beyond reasonable doubt.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Bibek Chaudhuri and Justice Rana Vikram Singh adjudicated an appeal challenging the dismissal of a divorce petition by the Family Court. The Court affirmed that uncorroborated, vague claims of an illicit relationship fail to meet the rigorous standard of proof required to dissolve a marriage on grounds of adultery.

Evaluating the evidence regarding the alleged infidelity, the Court emphasized the crucial distinction between suspicious circumstances and actual adulterous acts.

The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "There is gulf of difference between the term “compromising position” and “having sexual intercourse”. Surprisingly enough, the appellant did not make any complaint against his wife after the alleged occurrence. Even no sanha was made in the local police station. No complaint was made to his matrimonial relations. The parents and other relations of the appellant did not come forward to assert in support of the allegation."

Addressing the required standard of proof, the Bench noted the legal principle laid down by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Hargovind Soni vs. Ramdulari ( "1985 SC Online MP 109": 1985 CaseBase(MP) 259), pointing out that while civil suits are generally decided on preponderance of probabilities, a finding of adultery requires higher evidentiary probity.

The Court observed: "Perusal of the above observation clearly suggests a shift regarding evidentiary probity of a civil suit and the allegation of adultery made in the suit for divorce. While a civil suit including other grounds of divorce can be proved on the basis of preponderance of probability, adultery is held to be proved beyond reasonable doubt."

Background

The parties were married on July 2, 2006, and had a male child in 2010. The appellant-husband filed a suit for divorce under Section 13(1)(i) and Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, alleging that his wife indulged in an illicit relationship with her brother-in-law and treated him with cruelty. He claimed to have seen them together in a compromising situation. Conversely, the respondent-wife denied all allegations in her written statement, asserting that the accusations were fabricated and themselves constituted cruelty. She counter-alleged that the husband attempted to poison her and refused to abide by a settlement reached in a local Panchayati.

The Principal Judge, Family Court, Madhubani dismissed the divorce suit (M.M. Case No. 86 of 2013 / M.M. Case No. 49 of 2017) on April 4, 2024. Aggrieved, the husband filed the present appeal. The High Court found the husband's allegations vague, omnibus, and unsupported by any police complaint, sanha, or testimony from family members. Consequently, the High Court affirmed the judgment and decree of the Family Court and dismissed the appeal.

Case Details:
Case No.: Miscellaneous Appeal No.445 of 2024
Case Title: Sanjay Kumar Jha v. Annu Devi & Anr.
Appearances:
For the Petitioner(s): Ms. Shyamli Kumari, Adv., Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Adv., Ms. Ayushi Gupta, Adv., Ms. Pragya, Adv.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Ratanakar Jha, Adv., Mr. Rajeev Yadav, Adv.

Source: 2026 CaseBase(PAT) 2666