The high court of New Delhi observed that there can be no greater cruelty than making false allegations against the ‘chastity’ of women.

The court made these remarks while issuing a decree of divorce on the petition of a woman who had been living separately from her husband for 27 years due to allegations made against her.

The court stated that the term ‘mental cruelty’ was an extensive concept that could encompass ‘financial instability’ within it.

The court added that if a husband does not engage in any profession or work, it could be considered a form of mental cruelty to the wife.

It noted that ‘mental cruelty’ cannot be defined within straight parameters. Spouses should consider the acts being complained of as causing mental agony and pain.

NDTV reported that a bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna said: “In the present case, it is easy to decipher the mental trauma as the appellant (woman) was working and the respondent (husband) was not working.”

The bench added: “There was a huge disparity in the financial status of the appellant and the respondent. The endeavours of the respondent to be able to sustain him had admittedly failed.”

The woman approached the high court to challenge the decision of the family court which dismissed her petition pertaining to granting her divorce decree on the grounds of cruelty and desertion.

The petition stated that the woman’s husband had started levelling allegations against her of having illicit relationships with her brother-in-law and others.

The husband of the woman gave a vague answer related to allegations that her brother-in-law and other family members interfered in their matter constantly, the statement of the man confirmed the woman’s testimony.

“There can be no greater cruelty than making false allegations against the chastity of a woman,” observed the court.

Moreover, the court said that the dead relationship brings pain and agony “We find that the court cannot be a party to the perpetuation of such mental cruelty”.

The man has denied all the allegations levelled against him, including that of dowry demands and cruelty.

The high court said the very fact that the parties have been living separately since November 1996 and no conciliation has taken place for the past 27 years, proves that the parties were unable to sustain their matrimonial relationship.