JUDGMENT Pradeep Nandrajog, C.J. - The wife is aggrieved by the judgment dated 27.05.2018 granting decree of divorce to her husband on ground of cruelty. The issue: Whether the appellant was guilty of adultery with respondent No.2 has been decided in favour of the appellant. There are no cross objections filed by the respondent to the impugned judgment. Thus, in appeal, our focus would be on the pleadings and the evidence on basis whereof the decision has been rendered. 2. Respondent's case was that marriage between the couple as per Hindu Custom was solemnized on 16.02.2009. After marriage the respondent found that the appellant was in constant touch with Bheru Gurjar over the Mobile No.9784089352. The two used to talk to each other for hours together. After talking to Bheru Gurjar appellant's behaviour used to become abnormal. At the drop of the hat she would pick up quarrel and abuse. Bheru Gurjar even rang up respondent and told him that he had physical relationship with the appellant. When respondent confronted the appellant she said that she was a modern girl. She taunted him of being more educationally qualified than him and said that if he troubles her by asking these questions she would implicate him in a false case for dowry harassment. On 21.01.2010 the appellant left the matrimonial house and took with her the jewellery and her clothes. When the respondent contacted her parental house he learnt that the appellant had not reached there and therefore on 22.01.2010 he lodged a missing persons complaint. He learnt thereafter that the appellant had reached her parental house. He made attempts that the appellant should return to the matrimonial house. But she didn't. He found a writing by the appellant in the house from which it was apparent that she was having relations with Bheru Gurjar. 3. In the written statement filed the appellant denied the assertions made against her concerning either her behaviour or she being in touch with Bheru Gurja over the telephone. With respect to the respondent's assertion in the petition seeking divorce that after the appellant left the matrimonial house on 21.01.2010 and after he had lodged the missing persons report on 22.01.2010 he found a writing of the appellant, she pleaded that the writing was obtained by the respondent under threat of leaving her. With respect to the respondent's assertion in the petition seeking divorce that after the appellant left the matrimonial house on 21.01.2010 and after he had lodged the missing persons report on 22.01.2010 he found a writing of the appellant, she pleaded that the writing was obtained by the respondent under threat of leaving her. As per the appellant, the respondent said that unless she writes what he desires, he would leave her. As per the written statement she was compelled to leave the matrimonial house because of harassment. 4. Appearing as his witness the respondent stated that he was married with the appellant as per Hindu Custom on 16.02.2009. She resided with him till 21.01.2010 and left the matrimonial house without a cause. She used to talk with Bheru Gurjar for hours together and after talking to him she would behave abnormally. That the appellant used to threaten him that she would involve him in a false dowry case and would taunt him of being more qualified than him. On 21.01.2010 the appellant left the matrimonial house and when he could not trace her he lodged a missing persons complaint (Ex.1) at Bagru Police Station on 22.01.2010. Due to on going elections the police requested him to wait for day or two. Thereafter appellant's brother informed him over the telephone that appellant had come to the parents house. She had left behind writings (Ex.5 and Ex.6). That he had recorded the conversation between him and his wife in three CDs' Ex.2, Ex.3 and Ex.4. (The transcripts thereof were tendered). That after the appellant left the matrimonial house attempts made to bring her back failed. She refused to come back. 5. Relevant would it be to highlight that during cross examination the appellant put no suggestion to the respondent that writings Ex.5 and Ex.6 were obtained by him under compulsion. Regarding the CDs' concerning recording of the conversation between the husband and the wife she suggested to him that after locking her in the room he prepared the CDs', meaning thereby the suggestion was that she was forced to speak over the telephone with her husband. 6. The appellant appeared as her witness and said that after marriage she was harassed. She did not have any mobile phone in the matrimonial house and yet in spite thereof her husband used to allege falsely that she was receiving phone calls. 6. The appellant appeared as her witness and said that after marriage she was harassed. She did not have any mobile phone in the matrimonial house and yet in spite thereof her husband used to allege falsely that she was receiving phone calls. Due to constant harassment she left the matrimonial house on 21.01.2010 and that her husband never came to take her back. That her husband forced her to write a letter under threat of abandoning her. She admitted during cross examination that she had a mobile telephone with her when she was in the matrimonial house and clarified that the mobile phone was in the name of her brother. She reiterated during cross examination that her husband threatened her and prepared the CDs'. 7. This then is the only evidence of the parties. 8. From a perusal of the testimony of the parties it clearly emerges that at the first instance the appellant falsely stated that on account of she not having any mobile phone in her matrimonial house she could not be in touch with anyone in the world outside. With respect to the contents of three CDs' in Ex.2, Ex.3 and Ex.4 she claimed that her husband forcefully confined her in the room and prepared the CDs'. Now, the CDs' contain the transcript of the talk between the appellant and the respondent and the contents of the talk clearly show that the respondent informed the appellant that he was receiving calls from Bheru Gurjar over his phone who claimed that he was in relationship with you. The appellant admitted that she knew Bheru Gurjar but claimed that he used to harass her over the telephone. It is not possible that the transcript running into 30 pages having at least 100 inter-se dialogues between the couple could be forced. 9. We just reproduce a part of the telephonic conversation as recorded in the CDs'. It is in Hindi. Translated it reads as under:- "Pushpendra: Hello! Anita: Hello yes speak. Pushpendra: Have you given my mobile number to anyone? Anita: Whom Pushpendra: To that boys. Anita: I have not given. What do I do. Now you please do what needs to be done. What can I do? Pushpendra: Please listen to me. That boy has rang me up twice. I have not informed your brother of the same. Anita: You got the call on your phone? Pushpendra: Yes. Anita: Whom Pushpendra: To that boys. Anita: I have not given. What do I do. Now you please do what needs to be done. What can I do? Pushpendra: Please listen to me. That boy has rang me up twice. I have not informed your brother of the same. Anita: You got the call on your phone? Pushpendra: Yes. I think I would switch off my BSNL number till tomorrow. What do we do? Anita: You please do something. What can I do? Pushpendra: I do not know what those boys want from me? I wonder why they ring me up? Anita: What do I do. I am so tensed and worried about my education and there is no hope that I would clear the exams because I remember not even a letter. What I read, I forget. Pushpendra: Do you know what that boy tells me? He asks me why I trouble you. Have I troubled you? Anita: No, who has said that? Pushpendra: That boy." 10. This is the beginning of the conversation between the couple and it is impossible to believe that it was a forced conversation. 11. Let us also have a look at the writings of the appellant Ex.5 and Ex.6 which she claims were taken by force. The documents are in vernacular. Translated they read as under:- Ex.5 "My name is Anita Sharma and I am friendly with Bheru Gurjar. But that boy was hell bent on ruining my life. He used to tell everyone that this girl take money from him. I cheated both my parents and my in-laws and because of me both families - My parents educated me and left nothing in my upbringing but in return I could give them nothing for which I am sad. On this issue, my last wish is that Bheru Gurjar- On account of being defamed in society, I am committing suicide. This Bheru Gurjar troubled me." Ex.6 "Bheru Gurjar who was resident of Kherwadi used to trouble me. He used to warn me that if I will not talk to him, he will blackmail me defaming me in the society that I am that type of girl and under this fear I used to talk to him. When I got married on 16 Feb. He used to warn me that if I will not talk to him, he will blackmail me defaming me in the society that I am that type of girl and under this fear I used to talk to him. When I got married on 16 Feb. 09, he managed to ring up my husband through a girl that she has affairs with many boys and she used to take money from them. 9784089352 He wanted to ruin my life. My last wish is that you should also ruin his and his entire family's life. He should be dismissed from service and should be punished with life imprisonment/death sentence as because of him my life has been spoiled. You need not be influenced by any one and that boy. He was my enemy but I failed to understand. It is my wish that he should be punished because he has threatened me that if I would not talk to him then he would ruin her life. sd/- Anita Shama" 12. A perusal of the contents completely rule out that somebody forced the appellant to pen the writings. In Ex.5 the appellant writes that her name is Anita Shama and she was friendly with Bheru Gurjar. But that boy was hell bent on ruining her life by spreading rumors that I take money from him. I have cheated my parents and my in-laws. Two families are being troubled because of him. My parents educated me and gave me all in life but in return I could give them nothing, for which I am sad. On this issue it is my desire that this Bheru Gurjar- on account of being defamed in society I am committing suicide but my last wish is- this Bheru Gurjar troubles me. 13. The way in which the document has been scribed rules out it being extracted out of force. Similar would be the position with Ex.6. 14. What has happened is obvious. The appellant was friendly with Bheru Gurjar who started troubling her over the phone after she got married with the respondent. The respondent would see her speaking over the mobile phone for long period with somebody. Troubled by Bheru Gurjar over the phone obviously the appellant would lose her compassion and this explains the allegations by the respondent that her attitude used to become abnormal after speaking over the telephone and she would abuse. The respondent would see her speaking over the mobile phone for long period with somebody. Troubled by Bheru Gurjar over the phone obviously the appellant would lose her compassion and this explains the allegations by the respondent that her attitude used to become abnormal after speaking over the telephone and she would abuse. This explains the appellant leaving the matrimonial house without informing her husband, which would also be an act of cruelty. She withdrew from the consortium i.e. denied sex to the husband and this would also constitute cruelty. 15. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.