In a landmark ruling that highlights how seemingly minor lifestyle choices can unravel marital bonds, the Gujarat High Court has upheld a family court's decision to grant divorce to a couple whose relationship disintegrated over dietary preferences. The case, which concluded on November 27, 2025, centered on the wife's adherence to a strict sattvic diet that excluded onion and garlic due to her religious beliefs, which the husband claimed caused him mental cruelty.
The Dietary Divide That Shattered a Marriage
The couple, married under Hindu rites, began their union with typical hopes of lifelong companionship. However, their home gradually transformed into a battleground over food choices. The wife maintained a sattvic dietary regimen—common in certain spiritual communities across India—which strictly prohibits consumption of onion and garlic. She asserted this was an integral part of her faith, known to her husband before their marriage.
Despite this prior knowledge, the husband argued that the practical implementation created unbearable domestic tension. His mother prepared separate meals for the wife without onion or garlic, while the rest of the family continued eating normally. This segregation at mealtimes sparked continuous arguments, emotional distance, and even involved police complaints and legal aid interventions.
Legal Grounds and Counterclaims
The husband eventually filed for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, citing cruelty and desertion. He contended that his wife's rigid dietary requirements forced separate cooking arrangements within their household, escalating conflicts to unbearable levels.
The wife countered these allegations by suggesting her husband had always sought an exit from the marriage, neglected his marital duties, and exaggerated claims about their domestic situation. Notably, she did not contest the divorce itself during proceedings—her lawyer conceded this point—but instead focused her appeal on seeking increased maintenance.
The Maintenance Battle
In her appeal, the wife claimed she had no independent income and portrayed her husband as a partner in a factory earning between Rs 60,000 to 1 lakh monthly. She sought Rs 20,000 in monthly maintenance along with separate residence from his joint family arrangement.
The husband presented salary slips showing an annual income of Rs 62,718 from a company, clarifying this wasn't from his father's factory. He emphasized financial constraints supporting his aging parents and a son pursuing a master's degree in computer engineering. The family lived modestly in one room with a kitchen, underscoring their limited means.
Court's Rationale and Verdict
The family court found merit in the husband's claims, determining that the wife's uncompromising dietary demands constituted mental cruelty. The marriage was dissolved with maintenance set at Rs 8,000 monthly from July 2013 to July 2020, then increased to Rs 10,000 ongoing—calculated under Section 25 considering both parties' incomes, lifestyles, and responsibilities.
The Gujarat High Court, in appeal number C/FA/3109/2024, upheld this decision after thorough evidence review. The bench noted the wife's lawyer couldn't disprove the husband's modest salary claims, and her admission about having a job weakened her financial dependency arguments. With "no cogent evidence" of higher earnings presented, the court dismissed her appeal, adjusted payment schedules (the husband had deposited Rs 4.27 lakh, with remainder to follow), and concluded without awarding costs.
Broader Implications for Modern Marriages
This case underscores how contemporary marital compatibility extends beyond emotional connection to encompass practical lifestyle alignment. Shared daily rituals like meals can become critical fault lines when fundamental differences emerge. The court's pragmatic approach acknowledged the cruelty caused by the dietary conflict without vilifying religious dietary practices themselves.
The husband had offered a one-time settlement to facilitate clean separation, but the wife declined this option. Ultimately, what began as disagreements over onion and garlic consumption revealed deeper incompatibilities that proved irreconcilable, serving as a cautionary tale about the importance of discussing and respecting core lifestyle values before and during marriage.
