The Supreme Court has dissolved a Hindu marriage by invoking its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, citing irretrievable breakdown of marriage. Overruling the decisions of the Family Court and High Court that had refused divorce and instead granted restitution of conjugal rights to the husband, the Court emphasised that prolonged separation and failed reconciliation attempts made reunion impossible.
Background:
The marriage was solemnised in April 1999, and the couple had a daughter in June 2001. According to the wife, the couple had been living separately since 2008, whereas the husband claimed separation began in 2012. Both parties admitted to a separation lasting over twelve years.
Earlier, a petition filed by the wife under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking divorce was dismissed by the Family Court. In contrast, the husband’s petition under Section 9 for restitution of conjugal rights was allowed. These orders were affirmed by the High Court. The matter reached the Supreme Court by way of appeal.
Arguments:
The wife, through her counsel, firmly opposed any possibility of reconciliation and pressed for divorce, asserting that the marriage had “completely broken down emotionally and practically.”
The husband, through his counsel, opposed the divorce on grounds of the social implications of divorce for their daughter, and contended that the wife had abandoned him after obtaining public employment, despite his support.
Supreme Court’s Analysis:
The Bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Manmohan heard both parties and also interacted virtually with the couple’s adult daughter, who is now pursuing a medical degree. Noting that the daughter was independent and capable of making her own decisions, the Court remarked:
“We found her sufficiently mature to make her own decisions… Suffice to record, we believe that it is a fit case for us to invoke powers conferred on us by Article 142 of the Constitution of India and to dissolve the marriage…”
Observing the prolonged separation and lack of communication between the husband and daughter, the Court held:
“We are persuaded to do so, having considered the prolonged period of separation and the multiple failed attempts at reconciliation, which clearly indicate that there is no possibility of reunion, as well as their age (both are quinquagenarian).”
When the husband again objected to the grant of divorce, citing the daughter’s future, the Court responded:
“We are not impressed by this submission, especially in light of the fact that the respondent-husband and his daughter have had no contact during the entire period of separation. To us, this appears to be a mere attempt to prolong the litigation and stall the inevitable.”
The Court noted that the absence of statutory grounds under the Hindu Marriage Act did not bar it from granting relief under Article 142:
“Even though the respondent-husband has vehemently opposed the prayer for dissolution of marriage contending that none of the available grounds on which a Hindu marriage could be dissolved is present, the same is not a bar for us to exercise our powers under Article 142…”
The Bench relied on the Constitution Bench ruling in Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 544, to affirm that irretrievable breakdown is a valid ground for dissolution of marriage under Article 142.
Decision:
The Supreme Court dissolved the marriage by decree of divorce and allowed the appeal. As the wife had not sought alimony, no direction was issued on that aspect.
“Accordingly, we dissolve the marriage between the parties by a decree of divorce… It is our hope that this quietus allows all members of the family to move on in life.”
