NEW DELHI: The Patna high court has dismissed a man’s appeal seeking divorce from his wife, holding that his allegation that she had an illicit relationship with the husband of her elder sister was not proved. The court said there was a “gulf of difference” between being seen in a “compromising position” and proof of sexual intercourse, and that a mere allegation could not establish adultery. The order was passed on September 3, 2026.Why did the husband seek divorce?According to the court order, the couple had married on July 2, 2006, and had a son in 2010. The husband alleged that after the birth of their son, his wife subjected him to cruelty and had an illicit relationship with the husband of her elder sister.He claimed that he had once seen the two in a compromising situation and objected to it. He further alleged that on March 30, 2013, the woman’s father and some others came to his house and forcibly took her away along with her belongings. He claimed that she had deserted him since then.The husband sought divorce under Section 13(1)(i) and Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, relying on adultery and cruelty as grounds.The wife denied the allegations, calling the claim about an illicit relationship with her brother-in-law “concocted” and “manufactured”. She also alleged that her husband had tried to kill her by poisoning. The Family Court at Madhubani dismissed the husband’s divorce case on April 4, 2024, following which he approached the high court.Why did the high court reject the adultery allegation?A division bench of Justice Bibek Chaudhuri and Justice Rana Vikram Singh examined the evidence and found that the husband had failed to prove that his wife had a sexual relationship with the husband of her elder sister.The court noted that although the husband claimed to have seen them in a compromising position, he did not lodge any police complaint or even make a complaint with his wife’s or his own family members after the alleged incident.“There is gulf of difference between the term ‘compromising position’ and ‘having sexual intercourse’. Surprisingly enough, the appellant did not make any complaint against his wife after the alleged occurrence. Even no sanha was made in the local police station,” the bench said.The high court relied on a Madhya Pradesh high court judgment which dealt with the evidence required to establish adultery. It noted that adultery generally has to be inferred from circumstances and that mere probability was not enough.“Proof of adultery must be of such character as would lead a reasonable man to conclude no other inference than the misconduct. Mere probability is not enough. No implicit reliance can be placed on the bald statement of the husband for recording a finding of adultery against wife,” the court observed.The bench said the husband’s entire allegation of cruelty was based on the alleged illicit relationship and the resulting accusations and counter-accusations. It found the allegations vague and insufficient to establish cruelty.“In the instant case, the husband failed to prove the allegation of having sexual relationship by his wife with the husband of her elder sister. Secondly, the entire allegation of cruelty revolves around the case of alleged illicit relationship and allegation and counter allegation,” the bench held.The high court found no illegality in the family court’s judgment and dismissed the appeal, thereby affirming the dismissal of the husband’s divorce case.