The Supreme Court recently invoked its extraordinary powers under Article 142 to dissolve a marriage on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown, emphasizing the need to deliver complete justice in cases of long-term separation.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: In a noteworthy verdict that highlights the constitutional power of the Supreme Court to do “complete justice,” the Apex Court in ABC v. XYZ (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 543) exercised its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution to dissolve a marriage marred by prolonged separation and the total breakdown of marital ties.
The appellant-husband had approached the Supreme Court challenging the judgment of the Jharkhand High Court, which had affirmed the Family Court’s decision dismissing his petition for divorce filed under Sections 13(1)(ia) (cruelty) and 13(1)(iii) (mental disorder) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Background of the Case
The couple had solemnized their marriage in 2012, and two children were born from the wedlock. In 2014, the husband filed for divorce before the Family Court in Ranchi. During that period, the respondent-wife was pregnant with their second child.
Subsequent to the filing, the wife accused the husband and his family of mental and physical cruelty and initiated criminal proceedings under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Tragically, their second child was later diagnosed with cerebral palsy.
The Family Court dismissed the divorce petition, and the Jharkhand High Court upheld this decision, noting that the parties had cohabited until March 2014 and that the birth of the second child in November 2014 weakened the appellant’s claim of cruelty. Aggrieved, the appellant approached the Supreme Court.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Dismisses Student’s Plea Over Age Bar in JNUSU Elections: Rules Are Rules!
Judicial Reasoning and Observations
The 3-Judge Bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol, and Sandeep Mehta carefully assessed the facts and noted that all efforts at reconciliation, including mediation, had failed. The parties had been living apart for more than a decade, and there was a “complete absence of marital ties.”
Quoting the Bench:
“The parties have lived separate lives for over a decade, and there is a complete absence of marital ties. In our considered view, continuing such a marriage would only perpetuate hardship and serve no useful purpose. This is a fit case for exercise of this Court’s jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to do complete justice and dissolve the marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown.”
The Court highlighted that despite the absence of a formal petition from the mother seeking custody or visitation rights of the elder daughter, she ought not to be alienated from her child. Recognizing the emotional and psychological needs of both the mother and child, the Court ensured a remedy rooted in compassion and justice.
The Bench ruled:
“Depriving the mother of all contact would not only cause emotional harm to her but may also adversely impact the child. In the interest of justice, equity, and the welfare of the child, we deem it appropriate to grant visitation rights to the respondent so that she may gradually rebuild a bond with her daughter.”
Final Directions
Allowing the appeal, the Court dissolved the marriage under its extraordinary powers vested by Article 142 of the Constitution. Additionally, it granted the respondent-wife visitation rights with her daughter twice every month. The parties were directed to mutually decide convenient dates for such meetings, which would take place at the appellant’s residence.
Significance of the Ruling
This judgment reflects the Apex Court’s progressive approach toward matrimonial disputes where statutory remedies fail to provide adequate relief. The use of Article 142 in this context bridges the gap between legal limitations and practical justice, especially in cases of irretrievable breakdown of marriage—a ground not yet codified under the Hindu Marriage Act.
The verdict reiterates the Supreme Court’s evolving jurisprudence in prioritizing human dignity, emotional well-being, and the futility of forced continuance of dead marriages.
CASE TITLE: ABC v. XYZ
Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 543
READ MORE REPORTS ON SUPREME COURT
FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE
