The Supreme Court rules that prolonged irreconcilable differences between spouses constitute cruelty, justifying divorce even when neither party is solely at fault. After 24 years of separation, the Court grants divorce, ending decades-long litigation.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court of India has emphasized that prolonged irreconcilable differences between spouses can amount to cruelty, justifying divorce, even when neither party is solely at fault. The Court dissolved a marriage that had effectively broken down over two decades, citing the inability of both parties to accommodate each other.
Background
The couple, both employees of the Life Insurance Corporation of India since 1992, were married in Shillong on August 4, 2000, under Hindu rites. Disagreements arose shortly after marriage, particularly over the wife’s career and familial responsibilities. The wife claimed she was pressured to leave her job, which she relied on to support her elderly mother, brother, and other dependents.
The husband filed for divorce in 2003, alleging desertion. While the trial court granted the divorce in 2010, the Gauhati High Court overturned it in 2011, stating there was no evidence that the wife intended to permanently abandon the marriage.
Supreme Court’s Observations
A Bench comprising Justice Manmohan and Justice Joymalya Bagchi restored the trial court’s decree, highlighting several key principles:
- Long-Term Incompatibility Can Constitute Cruelty
The Court clarified that cruelty is not only about overt acts of harm; when spouses refuse to adjust or accommodate each other for years, it itself becomes a form of cruelty. - No Need to Judge ‘Right’ or ‘Wrong’ in Marital Approach
Courts should not act as arbiters of personal differences but focus on whether continued cohabitation is possible or meaningful. - Divorce Can Serve the Greater Good
In cases of decades-long separation, with no children and failed reconciliation attempts, divorce prevents litigation unnecessarily, which benefits both parties and society.
The Court noted that the couple had been living separately for nearly 24 years, with no emotional or social bond remaining, and that continuing the marriage would serve no useful purpose.
ALSO READ: Chhattisgarh High Court: Taunting Husband for Joblessness is Cruelty, Grants Divorce
This ruling reinforces that:
- Prolonged separation without reconciliation qualifies as cruelty under Indian law.
- Supreme Court powers under Article 142 can be used to grant a divorce in extraordinary circumstances, bypassing traditional fault-based requirements of the Hindu Marriage Act.
- Matrimonial disputes should not remain pending indefinitely, as doing so only prolongs emotional distress and legal uncertainty.
The judgment cites the 2023 Constitution Bench decision in Shilpa Sailesh vs Varun Sreenivasan, which clarified that the Supreme Court is not constrained by the conventional fault-based framework while exercising Article 142 powers.
Case Title:
Nayan Bhowmick vs Aparna Chakraborty
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5167 OF 2012
READ JUDGMENT
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Cruelty
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Divorce
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
