ORDER : I.A. No.1/2025:- 1. Heard on application filed on behalf of the appellant under Order 41 Rule 27 for taking additional documents on record. By this application, the appellant has placed on record the judgment dated 27.05.2015 passed by the learned trial Court whereby the appellant has been discharged from the offences under Section 498A and 406 of IPC . 2. For the reasons mentioned in the application, same is allowed. 3. The judgment dated 27.05.2015 is taken on record and the same is marked as Document-C1. D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 4930/2015:- 1. By way of the instant appeal filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, (hereinafter to referred as ‘Act of 1955’) the appellant (hereinafter to be referred as ‘husband’) has raised his grievance against the judgment and decree dated 16.10.2015 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Aklera, District Jhalawar (hereinafter to be referred as ‘Court below’) in Civil Misc. Application No.53/2015 (83/2000) whereby the husband’s application filed under Section 13 of the Act of 1955 for grant of divorce was rejected. 2. The husband has invoked magnanimity of this Court to set aside the judgment and decree impugned dated 16.10.2015. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the husband filed an application under Section 13 of the Act of 1955 against the respondent (hereinafter to be referred as ‘wife’) before the learned Court below stating therein that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 28.05.1991 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. It was further stated that out of said wedlock, two daughters were born. It was further stated in the application that from the very beginning of their marriage, behaviour of wife was cruel with the husband and after the birth of second daughter, the wife left her matrimonial home and started living with her parents. It was further stated that when the husband requested his in-laws for sending her wife back to him, she refused to go and live with the husband and she deserted him without any justifiable reason. It was further stated that her wife lodged a false criminal case against him under Sections 498 -A and 406 of IPC . Lastly, prayed for allowing the divorce application. 4. The wife submitted reply to the said application and denied all the allegations leveled against her by the husband. It was further stated that her wife lodged a false criminal case against him under Sections 498 -A and 406 of IPC . Lastly, prayed for allowing the divorce application. 4. The wife submitted reply to the said application and denied all the allegations leveled against her by the husband. It was further stated in the reply that the husband and his family members demanded dowry, on account of which she has to leave her matrimonial home and lodged a criminal case against him under Section 498 -A & 406 of IPC . Lastly, prayed for dismissal of the divorce application. 5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the learned Court below framed the following issues:- 6. The husband in support of his case submitted his own evidence before the learned Court below as AW-1, AW-2—Rameshchandra Goswami, AW-3—Ramswaroop, AW-4—Latur Lal, AW-5—Shivprasad, AW-6—Sanjay Kumar Jain and AW-7—Anil Khidia. 7. The wife, in support of her contentions, submitted her own evidence as NAW-1 as well as evidence of NAW-2—Ram Prasad. 8. The learned Court below after recording the evidence of both the parties dismissed the application filed on behalf of the husband. 9. Being aggrieved of the judgment and decree dated 16.10.2015, the husband filed the present appeal. 10. Today, this Court has allowed the application filed on behalf of the husband under Section 41 Rule 27 for taking judgment dated 27.05.2015 (Docuement-C1) on record vide which the husband has been discharged from the offences under Sections 498 -A and 406 IPC . 11. In support of the above facts, counsel for the husband submits that the wife has left her matrimonial home without any justifiable reason and she has been living separately with her parents. Counsel further submits that the wife lodged a false criminal case against the husband under Sections 498 -A and 406 of IPC in which the husband has been discharged from the offences under -A and 406 vide judgment dated 27.05.2015. Counsel further submits that lodging of false criminal case against the husband amounts to cruelty to him. Counsel further submits that both the husband and the wife are living separately since the year 1998 and there is no chance of their reunion, therefore, prayed for allowing the appeal and granting the decree of divorce in favour of the husband. 12. Counsel further submits that lodging of false criminal case against the husband amounts to cruelty to him. Counsel further submits that both the husband and the wife are living separately since the year 1998 and there is no chance of their reunion, therefore, prayed for allowing the appeal and granting the decree of divorce in favour of the husband. 12. None present on behalf of the wife to argue the matter even in the second round. 13. Heard counsel for the husband and perused the judgment and decree dated 16.10.2015 as well as the material available on record. 14. The point of cruelty has been considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court at length & depth in catena of judgments and in a recent judgment delivered in the matter of Rakesh Raman Vs. Kavita , ( 2023) 17 SCC 433 , in para No.27 has held as under:- “We have a married couple before us who have barely stayed together as a couple for four years and who have now been living separately for the last 25 years. There is no child out of the wedlock. The matrimonial bond is completely broken and is beyond repair. We have no doubt that this relationship must end as its continuation is causing cruelty on both the sides. The long separation and absence of cohabitation and the complete breakdown of all meaningful bonds and the existing bitterness between the two, has to be read as cruelty under Section 13 (1) (ia) of the 1955 Act.” 15. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Narasimha Sastry Vs. Suneela Rani , 2020 (18) SCC 247 wherein para No.13, it is held as under:- “13. In the present case, the prosecution is launched by the respondent against the appellant against the appellant under Section 498 -A IPC making serious allegations in which the appellant had to undergo trial which ultimately resulted in his acquittal. In the prosecution under -A not only acquittal has been recorded but observations have been made that allegations of serious nature are levelled against each other. The case set up by the appellant seeking decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty has been established. With regard to proceeding initiated by the respondent under -A , the High Court? made the following observation in para 15: (Rani Narsimha Sastry case, SCC OnLine Hyd) "15. ... The case set up by the appellant seeking decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty has been established. With regard to proceeding initiated by the respondent under -A , the High Court? made the following observation in para 15: (Rani Narsimha Sastry case, SCC OnLine Hyd) "15. ... Merely because the respondent has sought for maintenance or has filed a complaint against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 498 -A IPC , they cannot be said to be valid grounds for holding that such a recourse adopted by the respondent amounts to cruelty.” The above observation of the High Court cannot be approved. It is true that it is open for anyone to file complaint or lodge prosecution for redressal of his or her grievances and lodge a first information report for an offence also and mere lodging of complaint or FIR cannot ipso facto be treated as crueltv. But, when a person undergoes a trial in which he is acquitted of the allegation of offence under -A , levelled by the wife against the husband, it cannot be accepted that no cruelty has been meted out on the husband. As per the pleadings before us, after parties having been married on 14-8- 2005, they lived together only 18 months and, thereafter, they are separately living for more than a decade now.” 16. We have also considered the fact that in the criminal case filed by the wife against the husband under Sections 498 -A and 406 of IPC , the husband has been discharged from the said offences vide judgment dated 27.05.2015 (Document-C1). In our considered view, lodging of false criminal case against the husband by the wife amounts to cruelty to him. 17. We have also considered the fact that the wife has deserted the husband without any justifiable reason and she has been living separately for the last 27 years. In our considered view, such act on the part of the wife amounts to cruelty to the husband. 18. We have also considered the fact that both the husband and the wife are living separately for the last 27 years and asking both of them to live together at this point of time would amount to cruelty to both them. 19. 18. We have also considered the fact that both the husband and the wife are living separately for the last 27 years and asking both of them to live together at this point of time would amount to cruelty to both them. 19. In view of the above discussion, the finding recorded by the learned Court below on issue No.1 is perverse and the same deserves to be set-aside, and accordingly, the same is set aside. Issue No.1 is decided in favour of the husband. 20. In that view of the matter, the appeal filed on behalf of the husband is allowed. The judgment and decree dated 16.10.2015 is set aside and the marriage solemnized between the parties on 28.05.1991 stands dissolved. 21. Office is accordingly directed to prepare the decree. 22. Record of the learned Court below be sent back.