Pune: Mere communication with another woman and an alleged obscene video call were not enough to establish adultery, a Pune court held while granting divorce to a 32-year-old woman on the ground of cruelty.Additional district and sessions judge Kavita Vitthal Parit on Tuesday passed the order in a petition filed by a woman alleging that her husband was involved with other women. She sought dissolution of their marriage on the grounds of adultery and cruelty.The couple had married in a Kerala church on May 31, 2015. The proceedings were conducted ex parte as the husband did not appear before the court.The woman had produced material related to the husband’s communications with other women, his activity on dating applications and an alleged obscene video call. The court said such material did not establish the essential ingredient of adultery.The court observed that “mere communication with another woman itself does not establish that the respondent had sex…” It further held that the alleged video did not establish that the husband had sexual relationship with the woman concerned. The court also noted that the alleged adulterers had not been joined as co-respondents.While the adultery ground failed, the woman succeeded on her allegation of cruelty. The court considered her evidence regarding the husband’s alleged aggressive behaviour, physical and sexual abuse, alcohol consumption, insults and financial control, and held that cruelty had been established. The marriage was accordingly dissolved on that ground.The woman had sought a permanent alimony of Rs1 lakh per month for herself and Rs50,000 per month for her minor son, besides permanent custody of the child, separate residence, a Rs50 lakh fixed deposit for the child’s future education and other reliefs. Most of these claims were rejected.The court declined permanent alimony to the woman after noting that she was employed and earned about Rs1.25 lakh per month. It ordered the husband to pay Rs10,000 per month towards the maintenance of their minor son. It also declined to grant the mother a declaration of permanent custody of the child. The court rejected her claim for Rs50 lakh fixed deposit and other financial reliefs, too.
