In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has dissolved the marriage of a doctor couple on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown, acknowledging that the couple has only lived together for 43 days over the past 22 years. The decision was made by a bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Satish Chandra Sharma, who noted that the couple’s matrimonial bond had been irreparably damaged.
Marriage Breakdown and Legal Battles
The couple, both professionally qualified medical doctors, had been embroiled in a long and contentious legal battle since 2002. The court highlighted that despite the wife’s claim that she was willing to continue the marriage, her actions, including lodging a missing complaint against her husband, contradicted her statements and indicated a deep-seated rift.
“The marriage has ceased to exist both in substance and in reality. The relation has even taken a sour taste as the families of the parties have also developed rivalries,” the bench observed. The court found that the husband’s claim that the wife’s willingness to live together was merely a tactic to delay proceedings and cause him harassment had merit.
Previous Court Rulings
The Supreme Court’s decision overturned a 2019 Allahabad High Court ruling that had quashed the decree of divorce granted by the Family Court in Meerut in 2006. The bench referred to a previous ruling by the Supreme Court in the case of Shilpa Shailesh v Varun Sreenivasan (2023), where the court held that it has the discretion to dissolve marriages on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown to achieve “complete justice,” even if one spouse opposes the divorce.
The bench noted that in the present case, the marriage had failed completely, with no hope of reconciliation, as evidenced by the long separation and multiple legal battles, including criminal cases, between the couple. The court pointed out that the couple had only lived together for 43 days since their marriage, including a brief period ordered by the sessions court for conciliation. Given that both parties are now in their early 50s and have built independent lives, the possibility of them living together again was deemed virtually non-existent.
No Permanent Alimony Awarded
Interestingly, the court also declined to award permanent alimony to either party, considering that both are well-qualified professionals with sufficient and equal earnings. The court emphasised that continuing the legal relationship between the parties was unjustified under the circumstances.
Exercise of Article 142
The Supreme Court exercised its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to dissolve the marriage. The bench also relied on the case of Rajib Kumar Roy vs Sushmita Saha (2023), where the court had dissolved a marriage where the parties had been living separately for 12 years.
The Supreme Court’s ruling is seen as a significant application of Article 142, reinforcing the court’s authority to dissolve marriages in cases where the relationship has broken down beyond repair, even when one party opposes the divorce.