The Supreme Court has held that where a marriage has broken down beyond repair and years of hostility have extinguished any emotional bond, continuing the legal relationship serves no purpose. Allowing an estranged couple to part ways, the top court on Wednesday dissolved their marriage by invoking its special powers under Article 142 of the Constitution.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta recorded a full and final settlement between the spouses and ruled that the marriage, which was marked by long separation and contested litigation, had “irretrievably broken down”. The wife contested the divorce, but the court concluded that the marital relationship had ceased to exist “in any real sense”.
“Years of acrimony and bitterness have defined their relationship, and despite the appellant-wife contesting the grant of divorce, we find that no marital bond survives between them. In these circumstances, there is no purpose in perpetuating a legal relationship that has ceased to have any meaning,” held the bench.
The couple married in October 2009. The wife alleged that she faced mental and physical harassment at her matrimonial home and left in April 2010, while pregnant. She later gave birth to their son at her parental home in December 2010. Over the years, the parties became embroiled in multiple legal proceedings, including maintenance claims under the Criminal Procedure Code, complaints under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, and subsequent appellate and revision proceedings.
The trial court had earlier directed the husband to pay monthly maintenance and compensation and granted the wife custody of their child. Some of these orders were modified or set aside by the appellate courts. Eventually, both spouses challenged the orders before the Supreme Court, leading to the present proceedings.
{{/usCountry}}The trial court had earlier directed the husband to pay monthly maintenance and compensation and granted the wife custody of their child. Some of these orders were modified or set aside by the appellate courts. Eventually, both spouses challenged the orders before the Supreme Court, leading to the present proceedings.
{{/usCountry}}During the hearing, the court noted that the parties had been living apart for over 15 years, and even mediation at the Supreme Court Mediation Centre had failed to revive the relationship.
The court recorded the husband’s willingness to pay ₹1 crore as permanent alimony towards a full and final settlement of all claims. After considering the financial position of both sides, the bench held that the amount was “just, fair and reasonable.”
The court directed that upon payment, all civil and criminal proceedings arising from the marriage shall stand closed, and neither party shall raise further claims. However, the order clarified that the husband is not precluded from contributing further to the child’s education, should he choose to do so.
By invoking Article 142 to dissolve the marriage despite lack of mutual consent, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that it may exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction where a marriage is found to be beyond salvage, and continuing it would only prolong hardship.
In Shilpa Sailesh Vs Varun Sreenivasan (2023), a constitution bench affirmed the Supreme Court’s authority to grant divorces under Article 142 on the grounds of an “irretrievable breakdown of marriage.” It was declared that enabling the top court to grant such divorces promotes “complete justice” in marital disputes. The judgment held that the apex court can grant a divorce without sending the parties to a family court where they usually wait for between six and 18 months to obtain a decision by mutual consent, and said it can rule on a case even when one of the parties is not agreeable to a divorce.
To be sure, irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not a ground available under the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA) for couples seeking separation but the Supreme Court, through its judgment, can grant decrees of divorce exercising its unique jurisdiction, under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, to do complete justice between the parties. Some of the other grounds of divorce under the HMA include adultery, desertion, conversion and insanity.