The Supreme Court’s decision in K. Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa (2013) remains one of the most important rulings defining mental cruelty in marriage. The Court recognized that repeatedly attacking a spouse’s character, filing baseless criminal cases, and engaging in hostile conduct can create deep psychological suffering—even when the couple is already separated.
Brief Background
Married in 1999, the husband and wife lived together for only two days before the relationship collapsed. Their dispute escalated into years of litigation involving petitions, counter-petitions, and increasingly serious allegations.
Why the Case Reached the Supreme Court
The husband sought divorce on grounds of cruelty. The Family Court agreed, but the High Court reversed the decision, reasoning that since the spouses never lived together, cruelty could not be proved. The matter was then taken to the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court’s Observations
The Court disagreed with the High Court and clearly held:
-
Cruelty can occur even after separation—false complaints, defamatory notices, and threats are independent acts of cruelty.
-
Allegations attacking a spouse’s moral character are extremely grave and amount to mental cruelty.
-
Once a marriage has broken down irretrievably, forcing the parties to remain legally bound only deepens their suffering.
Acts Considered as Cruelty in This Case
-
Dowry harassment FIRs that were found to be false.
-
Shockingly defamatory claims about family members.
-
Abusive and threatening communications.
-
Complete lack of reconciliation for over a decade.
Final Ruling
The Supreme Court restored the Family Court’s decision and granted divorce to the husband.
The ruling serves as an important reminder that mental cruelty encompasses more than physical harm and can arise from malicious legal actions.
For a deeper breakdown of the case, you can
Read the full detailed case analysis on AM Legal.
