Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(III)Be that as it may, the respondent wife left the matrimonial home on 31.10.1992 in USA. She accused the petitioner of incestuous child abuse of daughter Nikita, who was then four years old. A police complaint was lodged in the United States. It is the petitioner's contention that the police, after investigation, found the allegation of incestuous child abuse as untrue. The respondent wife-returned to India with the children in March, 1993.

(IV)The Family Court in New York had ordered the custody of the children to be given to the petitioner. Petitioner has filed on record copy of a decree of divorce dated 24.2.1997, by which the Supreme Court of New York has dissolved his marriage with the respondent. Petitioner has been awarded sole custody of the children and further it has been declared that the petitioner has no liability for payment of maintenance to respondent.

(4) Learned Counsel for the petitioner relies heavily on the judgment of the Apex Court wherein the Apex Court has considered the complaints made by the respondent in incestuous child abuse against the petitioner, in New York as well as in Delhi. The Apex Court observed that the complaint made by the respondent with the New York Police about the petitioner committing sexual offences, was investigated by the New York Police who found the complaint bereft of truth, hook, line and sinker. As regards the complaint in India, the Court observed that the respondent had not even remotely alleged sexual abuse in the complaint filed before the Caw Cell in 1993. The Court found the respondent to be brimming with "ACERBITY towards the petitioner on account of other causes".