Wife's Abusive Remarks, Abandoning Marital Home, and Failure to Repay Money Deemed as Acts of Cruelty, Ruled by Chhattisgarh High Court
In a recent development, the Delhi High Court has granted bail to Rahul Bundela in the case of Rahul Bundela vs. State of Haryana. The case stems from an incident that took place in a sawmill, where the complainant, Gurudayal, a Scheduled Caste member, was allegedly attacked by Rahul and others with rods and sticks.
The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the lower court's order, and granted bail, subject to furnishing personal and surety bonds. Rahul argued that there was a three-day delay in lodging the FIR, that he himself belonged to a Scheduled Caste (supported by a certificate), and therefore the SC/ST Act could not be invoked against him. However, the High Court noted that since Rahul himself belongs to a deprived Scheduled Caste, it was questionable whether the provisions of the SC/ST Act could apply to him.
The High Court further observed that no particular injury or weapon was linked to Rahul, and the caste-based abuses were not specifically attributed to him. CCTV footage of the incident was collected, and several co-accused were arrested, but Rahul was arrested much later, in June 2025.
Elsewhere, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has made a landmark ruling, stating that an adult woman over 18 has the right to decide whom she wants to live with, regardless of whether the choice is considered morally right or wrong. This ruling was affirmed by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud in the case X vs. Madhya Pradesh and others.
In another significant ruling, the Delhi High Court stressed the importance of maintaining a healthy relationship between siblings, especially when parents are living separately. This was highlighted in the case X vs. Y before the Delhi High Court.
Moreover, the Delhi High Court has held that deliberately misrepresenting one's marital history is a "material fact" that goes to the very root of a marriage contract and impacts free and informed consent. This decision underscores the Court's commitment to upholding the sanctity of marriage and ensuring that all parties involved are aware of the true circumstances.
In a separate ruling, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has granted bail, observing that the SC/ST Act may not apply as the accused himself belongs to a deprived scheduled caste. This fact does not specify the case details.
Lastly, the Chhattisgarh High Court has ruled that a wife's taunts, leaving the matrimonial home, and refusal to return amounts can be considered as cruelty in the case of Anil Kumar Sonmani vs. Shradha Tiwari. This decision emphasizes the Court's stance on protecting the rights of individuals in a marriage and addressing instances of domestic abuse.
These rulings underscore the ongoing efforts of the Indian judiciary to uphold the rights of individuals, promote healthy relationships, and address issues of domestic abuse and discrimination.
