Bengaluru, July 19: The Karnataka High Court ruled in a significant decision that it is mental harassment to use a wife who has no emotional relationship as “a cash cow and ATM.” In the case where the lower court’s order had been set aside, the court also granted the wife a divorce.
The division bench, presided over by Justices Alok Aradhe and J.M. Khazi, issued the ruling recently after considering a petition filed by a woman challenging the lower court’s decision to deny her a divorce.
The panel declared that the husband had defrauded the wife of Rs 60 lakh under the guise of conducting business. “He had considered her as a cash cow. There is no emotional potential attachment to ger and he has mechanical bonding. Due to the behaviour of the husband, the wife has suffered mental trauma.”
“The pain inflicted on the wife by husband in this case could be considered as mental harassment. The family court has failed to consider all these factors. Furthermore, the court has not done cross examination of the petitioner wife and recorded her statements,” the bench said.
“Considering the arguments by the wife, divorce is being granted to her,” said the court. The bench also underpinned that in cases of family dispute, the cruelty allegations must be verified on the merits of the case.
The couple was married in 1991 and had a baby girl out of wedlock in 2001. The husband, who was running a business, was struggling to repay loans. This had led to quarrels at home. The petitioner’s wife had joined a bank to take care of herself and child.
From 2008, the wife gave money to her husband and he spent it without repaying loans. The man is alleged to have been emotionally blackmailing the petitioner to extract money. Later she realised that her money was being misused and her husband was not working even after receiving Rs 60 lakh.
The petitioner’s wife supported husband to open a salon in Dubai. The petitioner, however, failed to run the salon and incurred losses and returned to India. After which, the wife filed a divorce petition with the family court. The family court had rejected her petition, saying that there was no cruelty involved in the case.
