Family Courts Must Evaluate Oral Evidence In Background Of Normal Human Behaviour Without Generalising Or Stereotyping: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court held that in matrimonial matters where oral evidence is the primary basis, Family Courts must assess testimony against “normal human behaviour” without relying on sweeping generalisations or stereotypes. The case involved a wife’s appeal of a dismissed divorce petition on cruelty, where the Family Court broke her testimony into isolated episodes and disbelieved them for lack of corroboration. The High Court said that in a scenario with minimal documentary evidence, courts must weigh the relative credibility of the parties’ accounts holistically and apply the standard of preponderance of probabilities.

It criticized the trial court’s approach of faulting the wife for not filing complaints abroad or dismissing inconsistencies without contextual understanding. The judgment reinforces a more realistic and empathetic evaluation of human testimony in family disputes, cautioning against rigid expectations of perfect consistency.