# Rememberancer , West Bengal v. Anil

- **Citation:** (2007) 2 ILRA 635
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2007-03-22
- **Case number:** First Appeal No. 134 of 2007
- **Bench:** Amitava Lala, Shishir Kumar
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/rememberancer-west-bengal-v-anil-40979
- **Pages:** 2

## Headnote

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 -Section 14-
provision- appeal in continuation of
original suit-Decree for Divorce can be
passed
by
the
Appellate
courtdissolution marriage before expiry of one
year- Considering the peculiar fact and
circumstances of the case-when both
husband and wife voluntarily inclined to
withdraw
their
matrimonial
lifecontinuance of litigation-Cause mental
and
physical
harassment-Decree
for
divorce
passed-by
appellate
Court
instead of remitting the same before the
original court.

Held: Para 6

Therefore, it is a fit case to apply the
proviso to Section 14 of the Act by the
High
Court
itself
in
appeal
being
continuance
of
original
proceeding.
Hence, by consent of the parties the
appeal is disposed of by passing decree
for divorce upon setting aside the order
of the court below without remitting to
that court unnecessarily in the above
circumstances.
636 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2007

## Text

2 All] Manish Sirohi V. Smt. Meenakshi
635
matter
remains
for
the
reason
of
suspicion, can not taken the place of
proving of guilt at the conclusion of the
trial but on the final stage if there is
strong suspicion which leads the court to
think that there is ground for presuming
that accused has committed an offence
then it is not open to the court concerned
to say that there is no sufficient ground
for proceeding against the accused, it has
been held by Hon'ble Apex Court in the
case
of
Superintendent
of
Rememberancer , West Bengal Vs. Anil
Kumar Bhunja and others 1979 SCC
(Crl.) 1938 and in the case of State of
Bihar Vs. Ramesh Singh 1977 SCC
(Crl.)533.

9. In view of the above discussion
and from the perusal of the material
collected by the I.O. it appears that prima
facie offence is made out and there is
sufficient material to proceed further
against the accused. The learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate erroneously discharged
the revisionists. The order of the discharge
dated 12.4.2001 is illegal, which has been
rightly set aside by the learned Addl.
Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Basti vide
impugned order dated 22.3.2007. The
impugned order dated 22.3.2007 is a
perfect order, it has been passed after
considering the legal position and facts of
the case. The impugned order does not
require any interference therefore, the
impugned order is affirmed. The prayer for
quashing the impugned order is refused.

Accordingly
this
revision
is
dismissed.
---------

APPELATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 31.07.2007

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE AMITAVA LALA, J.
THE HON'BLE SHISHIR KUMAR, J.

First Appeal No. 134 of 2007

Manish Sirohi

...Appellant
Versus
Smt.Meenakshi

 ...Respondent

Counsel for the Appellant:
Sri. Divakar Rai Sharma

Counsel for the Respondent:
Sri. Amit Daga

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 -Section 14-
provision- appeal in continuation of
original suit-Decree for Divorce can be
passed
by
the
Appellate
courtdissolution marriage before expiry of one
year- Considering the peculiar fact and
circumstances of the case-when both
husband and wife voluntarily inclined to
withdraw
their
matrimonial
lifecontinuance of litigation-Cause mental
and
physical
harassment-Decree
for
divorce
passed-by
appellate
Court
instead of remitting the same before the
original court.

Held: Para 6

Therefore, it is a fit case to apply the
proviso to Section 14 of the Act by the
High
Court
itself
in
appeal
being
continuance
of
original
proceeding.
Hence, by consent of the parties the
appeal is disposed of by passing decree
for divorce upon setting aside the order
of the court below without remitting to
that court unnecessarily in the above
circumstances.
636 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2007
(Delivered by Hon'ble Amitava Lala, J.)

1. The fact of the case is that the
appellant/husband was the petitioner in
the court below in making an application
in the nature of Section 12 of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred
to as the 'Act') for the purpose of divorce
since immediately after the marriage there
was no relationship amongst themselves
i.e. the husband and the wife. The
respondent/ wife filed a written statement
also specifically stating under paragraph
17 that she is not inclined to continue
marital relationship with her husband.

2. Inspite of the same, the Court was
not pleased to pass decree/order for
divorce taking a plea that as per Section
14 of the Act Court cannot entertain any
petition for dissolution of a marriage by a
decree of divorce, unless at the date of the
presentation of the petition one year has
elapsed from the date of the marriage.

3. Against this background an
appeal was preferred. In the appeal
learned /counsel appearing on behalf of
the respondent/wife also made the similar
submission, as made in the court below.
However, the Court was inclined to know
directly from the husband and the wife as
to whether any chance of reconciliation is
available or they are serious in respect of
non-continuation of their marita1life.

4. Therefore, pursuant to the earlier
direction both the husband and the wife
become present before the court. They
have given answers to the queries of the
Court specifically. Firstly, both of them
identified by their learned counsel.
Secondly, they have submitted that they
are not inclined to continue their marital
relationship. Thirdly, they have submitted
that they are not inclined to go for any
reconciliation. Fourthly, they wanted
decree of divorce from this court.

5. We have gone through the
provision contained under the proviso to
Section 14 of the Act and we find that the
High Court can allow to present the
petition before lapse of one year from the
date of marriage on the ground that the
case is one of exceptional hardship to the
petitioner or of exceptional depravity on
the part of the respondent. It appears to us
that when immediately after marriage no
marital relationship developed amongst
themselves and they are voluntarily
inclined to withdraw relationship, their
life should not be allowed to be deserted.
When differences have occurred which
can not be compromised if at this stage
they are separated, they can be able to
enjoy their happy marital life elsewhere.
Continuance of the litigation will cause
mental and physical harassment to them
unnecessarily when both of them are not
inclined to continue with the relationship
at all. Both the parties have withdrawn
their allegations and counter allegations
against each other.

6. Therefore, it is a fit case to apply
the proviso to Section 14 of the Act by the
High Court itself in appeal being
continuance
of
original
proceeding.
Hence, by consent of the parties the
appeal is disposed of by passing decree
for divorce upon setting aside the order of
the court below without remitting to that
court
unnecessarily
in
the
above
circumstances.

However, no order is passed as to
costs.

Appeal disposed of.
---------