Husband’s Disinterest In Sex, Forcing Wife Into Spiritual Practices Amount To Mental Cruelty: Kerala HC

Written By :

Last Updated:March 31, 2025, 16:42 IST

The Kerala High Court granted divorce to a couple after the wife alleged that her husband was not interested in marital intimacy or starting a family, and forced her to visit ashrams and temples

Dismissing the husband’s appeal, the court found that the evidence clearly established mental cruelty. (PTI)

The Kerala High Court has ruled that a husband’s disinterest in sex and refusal to engage in family life, while forcing his wife to adopt his spiritual practices, amounts to mental cruelty, justifying the grant of divorce.

A Division Bench comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M.B. Snehalatha delivered the verdict while upholding the Family Court’s decision to grant divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, to a woman.

The court observed: “A marriage does not grant one partner the authority to dictate the other spouse’s personal beliefs, whether it is spiritual or otherwise. Compelling the wife to adopt his spiritual life, causing emotional distress to her, amounts to mental cruelty. Husband’s disinterest in family life indicates his failure to fulfill his marital duties."

The observation was made while hearing the case of a couple who were married on 23 October 2016, following Hindu traditions. The wife, an Ayurvedic doctor, alleged that her husband avoided sexual relations and showed no interest in having children. Instead, he spent his time visiting temples and ashrams, forcing her to accompany him against her will and adhere to superstitious beliefs. She further claimed that he prevented her from pursuing postgraduate studies and misused her stipend while she was enrolled at Rashtreeya Vidyapeedam. His behaviour, she said, caused her severe emotional distress and left her feeling abandoned in the marriage.

In 2019, she initially filed for divorce but withdrew the petition after her husband promised to change his behaviour. However, when he continued his neglect and coercive religious practices, she was left with no choice but to file for divorce again in 2022. The Family Court in Muvattupuzha granted the decree of divorce, prompting the husband to approach the High Court in appeal.

The husband refuted all claims, arguing that he had not forced his wife into any religious practices. He maintained that he had supported her education financially and denied any neglect of sexual relations. Instead, he contended that it was his wife who was unwilling to have children before completing her M.D. He also alleged that her parents interfered in their marital life for financial reasons.

Dismissing the husband’s appeal, the court found that the evidence clearly established mental cruelty. “Persistent neglect, lack of affection, and denial of conjugal rights without valid reasons cause severe mental trauma to the spouse, and we find no reason to disbelieve the petitioner’s account that she was subjected to such trauma," the court stated.

Relying on Roopa Soni v. Kamalnarayan Soni (2023) and Anilkumar V.K. v. Sunila P (2025), the court reaffirmed that “What constitutes cruelty in a matrimonial relationship depends on the unique circumstances, behaviour, and experiences of the parties involved. Courts do not rely on a rigid definition of cruelty but must evaluate each case on its own facts. Courts have to analyse whether the conduct makes it unreasonable for one spouse to continue living with the other."