JUDGMENT : Pradipta Ray, J. - The appellant-husband filed a petition u/s. 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956 for a decree of divorce against the respondent-wife. The said application was dismissed by the judgment and decreee dated April 17, 1997 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Cuttack. The husband has filed this appeal against the aforesaid judgment and decree of the Family Court. 2. The appellant sought divorce against the wife-Respondent on the ground of mental cruelty and desertion without any reasonable cause. The case of the husband-appellant, inter alia, is : The appellant married the respondent on February 8, 1981. Soon after the marriage the respondent came to the appellant's family. The respondent was always insisting that the appellant should stay away from his parents and live with the wife alone. As the appellant did not agree to the said suggestion, the respondent re-acted violently on the ' Dasahara Day' of 1986, misbehaved with the appellant, threw utensils and glasses and left the appellant to stay in Kendrapara town in a rented house. All persuations of the appellant to bring her back failed. Since 1988 the appellant has been deprived of the legitimate conjugal relationship. The respondent filed a complaint before the authorities of the Education Department against the appellant alleging illicit relationship with another lady teacher, named, Smt. Basanti Ray. The respondent also supplied informations to the Prajatantra Saptahiki which published a scandalous News item alleging that the appellant was having an illicit relationship with Smt. Basanti Ray. Because of such act of the respondent the appellant had to suffer indignity and humiliation. He was initially suspended from his service and ultimately he was transferred from Kendrapara to Dandi Sahi High School on November 27, 1990. The behaviour of the respondent particularly submission of complaint before the Education authorities and inducing the Prajatantra Saptahiki to publish a scandalous allegation against the husband subjected the appellant to mental and physical cruelty. 3. The respondent wife filed a written statement denying the allegations made in the petition. In her written statement she has alleged that the appellant has developed an illicit relationship with another lady teacher, named, Smt. Basanti Ray and has been living with her as husband and wife. According to her the husband has initiated the proceeding to get a decree of divorce so that he can marry the said lady teacher. 4. In her written statement she has alleged that the appellant has developed an illicit relationship with another lady teacher, named, Smt. Basanti Ray and has been living with her as husband and wife. According to her the husband has initiated the proceeding to get a decree of divorce so that he can marry the said lady teacher. 4. The husband-appellant examined himself as a witness. He also examined a Senior clerk in the office of the Inspector of Schools, Jagatsinghpur to prove the letter of complaint sent by the respondent-wife and a Sub-Editor of Prajatantra Saptahiki to prove that the informations contained in the articles published in Prajatantra Saptahiki were supplied by the respondent-wife herself. The respondent-wife examined her father, herself and Smt. Basanti Ray, the lady teacher. 5. On the basis, of the materials on record the Family Court disbelieved the story of mental cruelty and desertion against the wife-respondent and recorded its finding that the appellant was having an immoral relationship with Smt. Basanti Ray. On such finding, the Family Court dismissed the appellant's petition for divorce. 6. The appellant has failed to prove the allegations that the wife was misbehaving with his parents and other relations; that she was assaulting him and acting in violent manner and that she deserted the appellant without any reasonable cause. Regarding allegation of mental cruelty the appellant himself is the sole witness. No corroborative evidence has been led. No relation or member of the family of the appellant has come forward to depose in his support, Although it has been claimed in the petition for divorce that the neighbours intervened to bring about a conciliation, but no neighbour has been examined. In absence of any corroborative evidence it is not possible to rely upon the sole evidence of the appellant himself to accept his case of mental cruelty on the ground of alleged misbehaviour and activities designed to separate from the family of the appellant. In this connection reference may be made to the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Sankar Prosad Paul Chowdhury Vs. Madhabi Paul Chowdhury, and a decision Of this Court in Sadhana Chatterjee v. Smt. Krishna Chatterjee 1997 1 OLR 317 . In this connection reference may be made to the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Sankar Prosad Paul Chowdhury Vs. Madhabi Paul Chowdhury, and a decision Of this Court in Sadhana Chatterjee v. Smt. Krishna Chatterjee 1997 1 OLR 317 . In Sankar Prasad Paid Chowdhury (supra) the Calcutta High Court drew an adverse presumption against the husband for non-examination of the members of his family, who were described as witnesses to the alleged acts of cruelty and insult- by his wife. In Sadhana Chatterjee (supra) a Division Bench of this Court held against the husband petitioner because neither any family member nor any neighbour in whose presence the respondent-wife was alleged to have assaulted or used filthy languages, was examined. On the basis of the evidence on record, we also do not find any infirmity or any patent error in the finding of the Family Court that the husband has not been able to prove his allegations of mental cruelty and desertion against the wife. 7. It has been proved and in fact admitted by the respondent that she lodged a complaint about the appellant's immoral relationship with Smt. Basanti Ray before the authorities of the Education Department, got the appellant suspended and ultimately transferred out of Kendrapara School and that she herself supplied the information and even a photograph to the Prajatantra Saptahiki for publication of a News item on the alleged illicit relationship between the appellant husband and Smt. Basanti Ray. On the basis of the said admitted position learned Advocate for the appellant has submitted that submission of complaints before the authorities of the Education Department to victimise the appellant and engineering publication of a scandalous news against the appellant constitute acts of. mental cruelty, inasmuch as the respondent deliberately brought disrepute to him and lowered him in the estimation of general public. The learned Advocate for the appellant has also urged this Court to apply the doctrine of 'irretrievable break-down' and to put an end to the relationship which has already reached a dead end. 8. Allegations of illicit relationship by one spouse against the other may amount to mental cruelty. It is well-settled that the cruelty need not be confined to causing physical acts of cruelty and it includes mental cruelty, Persistent baseless allegations of infidelity against one spouse by another may amount to mental cruelty. 8. Allegations of illicit relationship by one spouse against the other may amount to mental cruelty. It is well-settled that the cruelty need not be confined to causing physical acts of cruelty and it includes mental cruelty, Persistent baseless allegations of infidelity against one spouse by another may amount to mental cruelty. But to constitute a mental cruelty the accusation should be without any reasonable basis. It has been held by the Calcutta High Court in Sujit Banerjee Vs. Anita Banerjee, that : "A survey of the judicial pronouncement, made from time to time, has since established a proposition of law that accusation of moral character by a spouse made against the other without any basis or foundation would most certainly constitute an act of mental cruelty against the other spouse accused as such......... It was, however, noticeable that the main thrust of this legal proposition was definitely on the point that such accusation against moral character would constitute cruelty only when those were baseless and unfounded meaning thereby, that if such allegations were not unfounded and if those could be entertained by a spouse of ordinary prudence in some given facts and circum-stances of an individual case, that would not be taken to be an act of cruelty." 9. In the present case the wife-respondent has made allegation of illicit relationship against the husband. Her allegation has been supported by her father. A photograph has been exhibited showing the husband-appellant, his son and Smt. Basanti Ray together. Scot. Basanti Ray has herself deposed as witness No. 3 for the respondent. She admitted that she knew the appellant since 1986 as they were working as teachers in Govt. Boys High School, Kendrapara. It has also been admitted by her that her husband Chaitan Jena filed a divorce case against her impleading the present appellant as a co-respondent and alleging illicit relationship between the present appellant and Smt. Basanti Ray. It is also admitted that husband of Smt. Basanti Ray got a decree for divorce on mutual consent. Although Smt. Basanti Ray has denied any illicit relationship with the present appellant and also the allegation of living together in a rented accommodation, other evidence on record at least establish ground for entertaining a genuine suspicion in the mind of the respondent-wife regarding the relationship between the appellant and Smt. Basanti Ray. Although Smt. Basanti Ray has denied any illicit relationship with the present appellant and also the allegation of living together in a rented accommodation, other evidence on record at least establish ground for entertaining a genuine suspicion in the mind of the respondent-wife regarding the relationship between the appellant and Smt. Basanti Ray. When the photograph is shown to Smt. Ray, she went to the extent of denying that the lady in the photograph, was she. The Family Court has recorded the demeanour of Smt. Basanti Ray while she was deposing and also the Courts' impression that she was intentionally trying to suppress her identity in the photograph. Such accusation or suspicion not being without any basis or foundation cannot be treated as mental cruelty in the facts and circumstances of the present case. However, the materials on record do not conclusively prove that the appellant has/had illicit relationship with the said lady teacher, but suspicion in the mind of wife was/is not totally unwarranted or baseless, Thus, we are unable to accept the finding of the court below that the appellant was/is having an illicit relationship with the said lady teacher. 10. Admittedly, the respondent lodged complaint against the appellant before the Educational Authorities. She was also instrumental in supplying materials, to the periodical 'Saptahiki Prajatantra' to publish a news item regarding the alleged illicit relationship of her husband with Smt. Basanti Ray, No exception can be taken to the wife's complaint before the authorities of the Education Department particularly when the husband and the other lady were both teachers in the same School. The wife did so in her desperate bid to pressurise the husband to snape his relationship with the lady teacher. However, her act of supplying materials to a periodical to publish a scandalous news about her husband's relationship is an unsupportable act. In her evidence the respondent-wife did not even offer any explanation for supplying the materials to publish news against her husband. However, as the wife had reasons to be suspicious about the intimate relationship between her husband and Smt. Basanti Ray, the said single act of getting a news item published against her husband does not warrant invocation of doctrine of "irretrievable break-down". The respondent has expressed her willingness to live with the appellant if he comes back to live with her. The respondent has expressed her willingness to live with the appellant if he comes back to live with her. The appellant and the respondent have two issues born out of their wed-lock. The appellant has denied any relationship with Smt. Basanti Ray. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the wife's desire to live with the appellant appears to be genuine and we do not think it to be a case fit for application of the doctrine of "irretrievable break-down". For the fore-going reasons the appeal is dismissed. P.K. Tripathy, J. 11. I agree. 12. Appeal dismissed. Final Result : Dismissed