PATNA, APRIL 11 2025 —In a significant matrimonial law ruling, the Patna High Court has held that Section 13(1)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, does not allow dissolution of marriage solely on the existence of a mental disorder. The mental condition must be so serious that the other spouse cannot reasonably be expected to continue living with the person suffering from it.
The judgment came in a matrimonial appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, challenging the decision of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Nawada, which had dismissed the appellant-husband’s divorce petition filed under Sections 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Division Bench of Justice P.B. Bajanthri and Justice Sunil Dutta Mishra observed:
“Section 13(1)(iii) of the Act does not make mere existence of a mental disorder of any degree sufficient in law to justify dissolution of marriage. The contents in which the ideas of unsoundness of mind and mental disorder occur in section as ground for dissolution of a marriage, require assessment of degree of mental disorder and its degree must be such that spouse seeking relief cannot reasonably be expected to live with the other. All mental abnormalities are not recognized as grounds for grant of decree. The burden of proof of existence of requisite degree of mental disorder is on the spouse who bases his or her claim on such a medical condition.”
BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
The marriage between the appellant-husband and respondent-wife was solemnized in 2005 at Akbarpur, Nawada, in accordance with Hindu customs. They lived together for nearly one year and eleven months.
The appellant alleged that soon after the marriage, he observed abnormal behavior in the respondent, which worsened over time. He claimed that she was suffering from schizophrenia and had also developed a permanent leg disability, affecting her mobility. He further alleged that the respondent had deserted him with mala fide intention.
The respondent, however, denied all allegations, including any diagnosis of schizophrenia or physical disability.
The Family Court dismissed the divorce petition, holding that the appellant failed to prove mental disorder or cruelty and that the respondent had not withdrawn from the marriage without reasonable cause.
HIGH COURT’S ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
While examining the evidence, the High Court noted that the appellant had not produced any medical records or examined the doctor who allegedly treated the respondent. As such, the claims of schizophrenia or physical incapacity were unsubstantiated.
Referring to the Supreme Court decisions in Ram Narain Gupta v. Smt. Rameshwari Gupta (1988) and Vinita Saxena v. Pankaj Pandit (2006), the Bench elaborated on the legal threshold for proving mental illness as a ground for divorce:
“In view of the above pronouncement, it appears that the ground of a spouse suffering from schizophrenia, by itself is not sufficient for grant of divorce under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Act as it may involve various degree of mental illness. The law provides that a spouse in order to prove a ground of divorce on the ground of mental illness, ought to prove that the spouse is suffering from a serious case of schizophrenia which must also be supported by medical reports and proved by cogent evidence before the Court that disease is of such a kind and degree that husband cannot reasonably be expected to live with wife.”
The Court also noted that the appellant had himself abandoned the respondent, weakening his grounds for seeking divorce on claims of cruelty or desertion:
“The appellant husband having deserted the respondent-wife, cannot claim divorce on grounds of cruelty or other allegations when he himself is at fault.”
CONCLUSION
Finding no error in the Family Court’s decision, the Patna High Court dismissed the appeal, reaffirming that the degree of mental illness must be serious and proven with strong evidence in order to justify divorce under Section 13(1)(iii).
Final Order: Appeal Dismissed. Family Court’s judgment upheld.
