Woman awaiting 'Shubh Muhurat' refuses to go to husband for 10 yrs; HC grants divorce

RAIPUR: Chhattisgarh high court has granted a decree of divorce to a man whose wife did not join him in matrimony for nearly 10 years because the ‘shubh-muhurat’ or auspicious time hadn’t come. The HC held that this amounted to desertion.

“The auspicious time is meant for happy family life. Instead, in this instant matter, it appears that auspicious time (shubh-muhurat) was used as a tool barrier by the wife to start their matrimonial home,” observed a division bench, comprising Justice Goutam Bhaduri and Justice Rajani Dubey.

The court ordered that the marriage be dissolved under the Hindu Marriage Act by a decree of divorce. The wife, in full knowledge of the facts, had deserted the husband, so he was entitled to get a divorce, the judges said in the order passed last month. A copy of it has now been made available.

Appellant Santosh Singh had moved HC, challenging a family court order, which had dismissed his petition for divorce on the grounds of desertion. According to his petition, he got married in July 2010 and he and his wife lived together for only about 11 days after which her family members came and took her away, saying they had some important work.

The husband tried to get her back twice but was turned down on the ground that it was not an ‘auspicious time’.

Singh then filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights, which was decreed ex parte. In response to the petition, the wife contended that she was ready and willing to join her husband but he did not return to take her back when the auspicious time started, which according to their custom was necessary. The wife also submitted that she had not deserted her husband and that he had failed to take her back as per their prevailing custom.

Singh’s counsel, however, submitted that the wife knew that the decree for restitution of conjugal rights had been passed but she still didn’t join her husband in matrimonial life.

The wife’s counsel submitted that the custom prevailing between the two parties was that during the ceremony of ‘Duviragaman’, the husband was required to come personally and take his wife back. The counsel argued that when the husband came to take her back, it was not an auspicious time, as per the advice of the pandit and elders of the family, and he was advised to come back at a particular auspicious time to take her back but he failed to turn up.

The high court, in its order, observed that the defence of ‘custom’ raised by the wife has not been proved in trial court, and granted the divorce decree.