My divorce case is nearing an ending . where both parties have submitted asset and liabilities. and the divorce case has moved to argument stage between lawyers. but when going through the asset and liabilities copy of my wife( she had deliberately delayed submission ). I found that : 1. she has stated multiple expense / availing loan without any backup. 2.she has deliberately inflated my salary in her asset and and liabilities . when my original salary slips have been provided to the court. 3. most importantly she has declared herself as " not completed MBA" when in her previous court hearing , she had stated herself to have done MBA. 4.she has stated in her filed asset and liabilities that I am possessing all the streedhan. where as in one mesaage conversation she has catagorically told me " she will sell all of her and my golds , which we had recived at our marriage for her own use". ( this message has not been presented in the court as evidence ). pls suggest if I should : 1. wait for normal proceeding to happen( which may finalize my divorce case in next 2-3 court dates) 2. file a petition to recall my wife for cross examination based on the asset and liabilities (which will delay my divorce finalization by another 7-8 court dates)
- If she has concealed the truth facts from the Court in her affidavit regarding her education etc. then you can move an application for Section 340 CrPc ( 379 of BNSS) for lodging an FIR against her .
- However , this application should be with the valid proof her education and the lie which she has mentioned in her affidavit for Asset and liabilities.
At the stage of final arguments, courts are generally disinclined to reopen evidence or permit recall of a witness unless it is demonstrated that such recall is essential for a just decision and that the facts could not have been brought on record earlier despite due diligence. Therefore, while filing an application for recall and cross-examination is legally permissible, it will inevitably delay the matter and the court may or may not allow it depending on how material the discrepancies are.
In your case, the issues highlighted by you—such as unsupported expenses, inflated income, inconsistency regarding educational qualification, and contradictory stand on streedhan—are certainly relevant. However, most of these can effectively be addressed during final arguments by pointing out contradictions on record and relying upon your documentary evidence, including salary slips and prior statements made by her in court.
As regards the streedhan issue, if you have a message clearly indicating that she had control over the jewellery and intended to dispose of it, that is a significant piece of evidence. Instead of seeking recall at this stage, you may consider moving a limited application seeking permission to place this additional document on record, if not already filed, or otherwise rely on existing pleadings and contradictions.
From a strategic perspective, if your primary objective is to conclude the divorce proceedings expeditiously, it would be advisable to proceed with final arguments and highlight all inconsistencies and false statements before the court. Courts do take adverse inference where a party makes inconsistent or unsupported claims.
However, if there is a substantial financial impact involved, particularly affecting maintenance, alimony, or property rights, and you believe that these discrepancies go to the root of the matter, then seeking recall may be justified despite the delay.
In conclusion, if the inconsistencies can be adequately addressed through arguments and existing record, it is prudent to proceed without reopening the case. If, however, the issues materially affect the outcome and cannot be effectively demonstrated otherwise, a recall application may be considered as a strategic step.
Please feel free to reach out if you require assistance in drafting arguments or an appropriate application.
Suggestion: It is advisable to await the progress and outcome of the next 2–3 hearings before taking any further legal steps.
From the contents it can be understood that the contradictions you have mentioned here have already been highlighted during the cross examination, therefore at this stage you are not left with any other option to reestablish your contradictions. If the observed contradictions have not been highlighted then you can plan to file a reopen and recall petition for this purpose and you should clearly mention in your affidavit that you are required to examine her once again to confirm the lacuna in her evidence deposed earlier.
if your primary objective is early disposal of the divorce case, it is advisable not to seek recall of your wife at this stage. Instead, you should ensure that all relevant contradictions, particularly regarding streedhan, are brought on record through additional documents and are properly highlighted during final arguments.
In a divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the Affidavit of Assets & Liabilities is mainly used to decide in Maintenance / alimony and Financial capacity of parties. At the argument stage, courts are generally reluctant to reopen evidence unless the issue is material and likely to affect the outcome.
At this stage, courts generally do not prefer reopening evidence unless it is shown that such reopening is absolutely necessary for deciding a material issue. With regard to the discrepancies in your wife’s affidavit, the claims relating to expenses or loans without supporting documents are not of significant legal consequence. The court usually relies on documentary evidence, and in the absence of proof, such claims can be effectively challenged during final arguments. Similarly, the allegation that she has inflated your salary is not likely to affect the outcome, as you have already produced your salary slips, and the court will rely on those official records rather than her statements.
The inconsistency regarding her educational qualification, where she has previously stated that she completed an MBA and has now stated otherwise, may affect her credibility to some extent. However, such inconsistency alone is generally not considered sufficient to reopen the case at the argument stage, as it does not directly impact the core issues in the divorce proceedings.
The allegation regarding streedhan is comparatively more important. If your wife has stated that you are in possession of all streedhan, and you possess evidence in the form of messages indicating that she herself has dealt with or disposed of the gold, this becomes a material aspect. This issue may have implications not only for financial claims in the present case but also for any potential future proceedings relating to recovery of streedhan.
In this context, filing a petition to recall your wife for further cross-examination is legally permissible under procedural principles embodied in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. However, such a step will inevitably delay the proceedings, and there is also a possibility that the court may decline the request if it finds that sufficient opportunity was already available earlier or that the application is intended to prolong the case.
You may file an application seeking permission to produce additional evidence, specifically the message relating to streedhan, along with a supporting affidavit. This will enable the court to consider the contradiction without causing substantial delay in the proceedings.
