Gurugram court allows ₹1.80-cr suit by man against wife over false dowry case

The ruling is being viewed as a significant relief for husbands entangled in prolonged litigation stemming from false matrimonial disputes.

In a landmark order, a district court has admitted a ₹1.80 crore damages suit filed by a UK-based man against his former wife, who had earlier accused him in a false dowry case. Delivered on August 13, 2025, by civil judge (senior division) Manish Kumar, the ruling is being viewed as a significant relief for husbands entangled in prolonged litigation stemming from false matrimonial disputes.

To be sure, the man was granted a divorce by a UK court in 2020. (Getty Images/iStockphoto)

The plaintiff, Gurusharam Lal Awasthi, had been acquitted of charges under Sections 498A (cruelty), 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code, first by a lower court in 2016 and later by a sessions court in 2018. Following his acquittal, Awasthi filed a civil suit against his ex-wife for malicious prosecution, citing financial losses and personal suffering during the 16-year long legal battle.

To be sure, Awasthi was granted a divorce by a UK court in 2020. However, neither he nor his wife filed for recognition of the decree before Indian courts. Under Indian law, a foreign divorce is not automatically valid unless it satisfies strict conditions, such as both parties submitting to the jurisdiction of the foreign court and the divorce being granted on grounds recognised by Indian matrimonial law. In the absence of such recognition, the marriage continues to subsist in the eyes of Indian courts.

The plaintiff’s ex-wife opposed the suit on August 13, contending that it was not maintainable since an appeal against Awasthi’s acquittal was still pending before the high court.Her counsel also argued that the mandatory court fee had not been deposited. However, rejecting these objections, the court held that the pendency of a revision petition does not nullify an acquittal and clarified that a tentative court fee is permissible in cases of unliquidated damages.

“The plaint prima facie discloses a cause of action for malicious prosecution,” judge Kumar observed, adding that the ex-wife’s claims of the suit being “false and concocted” could only be examined during trial. The matter has now been adjourned to November 20, 2025, for filing of a written statement.

Speaking to HT, Awasthi recalled his ordeal, “My marriage lasted only seven days, but I spent 40 days in jail and 16 years fighting cases. They demanded ₹1.20 crore to settle the matter, but I chose to fight. My passport was seized for three years; I couldn’t work, I couldn’t travel, and my family suffered immensely. I lost my father to the constant police harassment. No one can quantify the damage this caused to my dignity and life.”

Women’s rights activist and documentary filmmaker Deepika Narayan Bhardwaj, who assisted Awasthi, welcomed the ruling. “This judgement is worth applauding. It gives hope to thousands of men trapped in false dowry cases. Despite immense personal, financial, and emotional loss, this man continued his fight. His perseverance could pave the way for more men to seek justice through malicious prosecution cases,” she said.

Legal experts said the order underscores judicial recognition of the misuse of dowry laws and may serve as a deterrent against frivolous complaints in matrimonial disputes.

Adding perspective, Ambika Yadav, a senior lawyer at the Gurugram district court, said the order could set an important precedent. “For years, courts have been cautious in admitting civil suits for malicious prosecution in matrimonial disputes. By allowing this case to proceed despite a pending appeal, the court has clarified that acquittal is a valid ground for seeking damages. This is a strong message that misuse of criminal law cannot go unchecked, and it will open doors for similarly placed litigants.”