On Tuesday (2nd April), the Delhi High Court granted divorce to celebrity chef Kunal Kapur on the grounds of cruelty meted out to him by his estranged wife, saying the woman’s conduct towards him was devoid of dignity and empathy. The court also admitted that Kunal Kapur’s wife kept their son away from him and his parents. A division bench comprising Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna delivered the divorce verdict overruling a family court’s order denying the chef divorce.
The court said in its order, “When such is the nature of one spouse towards the other, it brings disgrace to the very essence of marriage and there exists no possible reason as to why he should be compelled to live while enduring the agony of living together.”
The couple, who now became estranged, married in April 2008 and welcomed a son in 2012. Kunal Kapur, a former judge on the television show “Master Chef,” asserted in his plea that his wife consistently disrespected his parents and subjected him to humiliation. Conversely, the woman countered by accusing him of leveling false accusations. She claimed to have always endeavoured to maintain loving communication with her husband and remained loyal to him. Allegedly, he withheld information from her and concocted false narratives to obtain a divorce.
The court determined that the wife’s behaviour falls within the scope of Section 13 (1) (i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. It criticised the Family Court for wrongly dismissing the husband’s divorce petition. Kunal Kapur’s appeal against the Family Court’s decision was thus upheld by the court. The couple, who married in 2008, have lived separately since May 2015, with their son under the wife’s custody. Despite the separation, Kunal Kapur has continued to financially support their son’s education and welfare, as well as contribute to the household expenses.
Upon reviewing the WhatsApp messages exchanged between the parties, the court noted that Kunal Kapur has been denied the opportunity to meet or communicate with his son. Despite his repeated requests, the wife has consistently avoided this and instead demanded payments from him on various pretexts. The court said, “Such deprivation of company of their son with the malicious intent to create a rift between the father and child, no doubt will put any parent in distress.”
The court observed that despite Kunal Kapur and his family experiencing significant emotional distress and a loss of social standing within the community, he still made additional efforts to reconcile and preserve his marriage. Additionally, the court noted that using loud and offensive language, even if not directly aimed at the spouse, is excessively harsh for the recipient to tolerate.
The court said, “This court is of the opinion that though there is no standard set for what amounts to a reasonable reaction to provocations in marital life, such acts of causing physical harm to a person is a reflection of one‟s inability to be in control of their temperaments and amounts to cruelty. It is observed in the said evidence that despite requests by the appellant (husband) to not continue the fight infront of their son, the respondent (wife) remained unbothered by it and acted in the heat of the moment. This kind of conduct would no doubt subject a spouse to grave cruelty.”
Moreover, the court observed that within just two years of marriage, Kunal Kapur successfully established himself as a Celebrity Chef, a testament to his dedication and perseverance. This achievement highlights that he did not rely on his spouse or in-laws for his basic needs.
The court said, “Considering the aforesaid facts, it is only prudent to observe that these are mere allegations made by the respondent to disrepute the appellant in the eyes of the Court and such unsubstantiated claims have the effect on one’s reputation and therefore, amounts to cruelty.” The court further emphasised that while marital disagreements are commonplace in every marriage, when these conflicts escalate to include disrespect and disregard towards one’s spouse, the very sanctity of the marriage is compromised.
