The Supreme Court observed that “compelling a dead marriage to continue only perpetuates mental agony and societal burden,” while granting divorce under Article 142, citing irretrievable breakdown and loss of mutual respect.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court stated that forcing a couple to remain in a dead marriage only leads to further mental distress, and therefore, courts should grant divorce when the spouses can no longer live together.
In a case that has lingered for 16 years, a bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta approved the husband’s plea for divorce, despite opposition from the wife.
The court observed that the couple had been living apart since a year after their marriage, and attempts at mediation had failed to resolve their issues. The court exercised its special powers under Article 142 to ensure complete justice.
The court stated,
“It has been consistently held by this court that the institution of marriage is rooted in dignity, mutual respect and shared companionship, and when these foundational aspects are irreparably lost, forcing a couple to remain legally bound serves no beneficial purpose,”
The Supreme Court further emphasized,
“It has been emphasised by this court in Amutha v Subramaniam that the welfare and dignity of both the spouses must be prioritised, and that compelling a dead marriage to continue only perpetuates mental agony and societal burden.”
In this instance, the couple married in 2008 according to Hindu rites, but differences arose soon after. They began living separately in October 2009, and the husband filed for divorce a year later.
His petition was rejected by the family court in 2017, and the Delhi High Court also denied his request in 2019, citing alleged cruelty.
Also Read: Marriage Rights for ‘Muslim Girls’ After Puberty| SC to Hear NCPCR’s Plea
Meanwhile, the wife filed a harassment case against her in-laws, which was also dismissed.
The Supreme Court noted that the couple had been living apart for over 16 years, marking a complete cessation of cohabitation and rendering the marriage defunct for all practical and legal purposes.
The court granted the husband’s divorce request, stating,
“In the present case, it is apparent that due to complete detachment and the prolonged estrangement, there has been an irretrievable breakdown of the marital bond, which cannot be mended by any means. Moreover, both the parties have spent the prime years of their youth entangled in this marital discord, which has persisted for more than the last 15 years.”
Also Read: Supreme Court: Ceremonies Required for a Valid Hindu Marriage
The court further asserted,
“It is as clear as a day in the case at hand, the continuance of marriage shall only fuel animosity and litigation between the parties, which runs contrary to the ethos of matrimonial harmony envisioned by the law. This would ring true even more in the light of appellant’s (husband) and his family members’ acquittal in the cruelty case preferred by the respondent. It cannot be expected by the appellant to now continue in a marital bond with the respondent, a partner who had filed and fought a false case against her husband and in-laws.”