The Karnataka High Court has held that the mere fact that a wife spent money from her own earnings to celebrate her child's birthday cannot by itself lead to the conclusion that her husband subjected her to cruelty.

The court pointed out that the wife had not asserted that she requested such financial assistance from the husband on the said occasion. [2026 LiveLaw (Kar) 402]

A Division Bench of Justice R. Devdas and Justice Brungesh M, sitting at Kalaburagi, made the observation, while dismissing the wife's appeal seeking dissolution of marriage on grounds of cruelty, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

For context, during cross-examination before the family court, PW-1 (the appellant-wife) had admitted that about one year after the marriage, she gave birth to a child. The said child's birthday was celebrated in a grand manner according to her.

At this juncture, the husband's counsel had suggested that the expenses for the birthday celebration were borne by his client. However, the wife denied the suggestion and explained that she herself had borne the expenses from her own earnings, and not the husband. Significantly, after the wife gave this explanation, the husband's advocate did not further cross-examine her on this aspect.

Noting all the aforesaid, the court observed that the explanation offered by the wife that she had herself borne the expenses is probable, and could be accepted. However, the Bench proceeded to examine whether this circumstance, by itself, was sufficient to conclude that the husband had subjected the wife to ill-treatment.

“…In the considered opinion of this Court, the mere fact that PW-1 [wife] herself incurred the expenses of celebrating the birthday of the child cannot, by itself, constitute an act of cruelty or ill-treatment..If PW-1 had stated that she had requested the respondent-husband to contribute towards the expenses of the celebration and that he had refused to shoulder such responsibility or to provide any amount for that purpose, the matter might have stood on a different footing”, the court said.

The Court noted that such evidence could have been relevant to assess the husband's conduct towards the child and the wife.

“…However, in the absence of any such evidence, the mere fact that the appellant-wife spent money from her own earnings for celebrating the birthday of the child cannot, by itself, lead to a conclusion that the respondent-husband had subjected her to cruelty or ill-treatment…”

For context, the wife had sought divorce before the family court alleging cruelty, dowry demand, physical abuse during pregnancy, and forcible abortion. The Family Court at Bidar dismissed her petition in March 2022. Aggrieved by the said order, she approached the High Court in appeal.

The Division Bench, after hearing both sides, found that the dowry demand was not pleaded in the original petition. Hence, according to the division bench, it could not be established merely through suggestions in cross-examination. It also noted that the allegation of forcible abortion was unsupported by any medical or documentary evidence.

On another note, the Court further held that irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not a statutory ground for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

The bench also observed that the husband's version of the event was that the wife's brother-in-law took her to her parental house, and she never returned afterwards. This version remained substantially unchallenged in cross-examination, the court opined.

Hence, the plea by the appellant-wife seeking divorce was dismissed.