This Court has had an occasion to examine in detail
the position of mental cruelty in N.G. Dastane v. S.
Dastane reported in (1975) 2 SCC 326 at page 337, para
30 observed as under :-
In the case of Sirajmohmedkhan
Janmohamadkhan v. Haizunnisa Yasinkhan & Anr.
reported in (1981) 4 SCC 250, this Court stated that the
concept of legal cruelty changes according to the changes
and advancement of social concept and standards of
living. With the advancement of our social conceptions,
this feature has obtained legislative recognition, that a
second marriage is a sufficient ground for separate
residence and maintenance. Moreover, to establish legal
cruelty, it is not necessary that physical violence should
be used. Continuous ill-treatment, cessation of marital
intercourse, studied neglect, indifference on the part of
the husband, and an assertion on the part of the
husband that the wife is unchaste are all factors which
lead to mental or legal cruelty.
In Rajani v. Subramonian AIR 1990 Ker. 1 the
Court aptly observed that the concept of cruelty
depends upon the type of life the parties are accustomed
to or their economic and social conditions, their culture
and human values to which they attach importance,
judged by standard of modern civilization in the
background of the cultural heritage and traditions of our
society.
The mental cruelty has also been examined by this
Court in Parveen Mehta v. Inderjit Mehta reported in
(2002) 5 SCC 706 at pp.716-17 [para 21] which reads as
under: