Execution Petitions Must Be Decided Within Six Months: Andhra Pradesh High Court Dismisses Serial Challenges to 24-Year-Old Execution Proceedings Unexplained Delay And Non-Compliance With Jail Manual Mandates Vitiate Test Identification Parade, Acquits Dacoity Convicts: Allahabad High Court Criminal Acquittal Does Not Conclude Disciplinary Enquiry: Calcutta High Court Upholds Dismissal Of Bank Officer For Extortion Licensee Cannot Invoke Doctrine Of Settled Possession Against Licensor To Defeat Suit For Eviction: Delhi High Court Extra-Judicial Confession Is A Weak Piece Of Evidence, Cannot Be Sole Basis For Conviction Without Independent Corroboration: Gujarat High Court Unilateral Deduction From Government's Profit Petroleum Violates Public Trust Doctrine: Delhi HC Upholds Rejection Of Vedanta's PSC Extension 'DEAD WOOD' MUST BE WEEDED OUT: Supreme Court Upholds Compulsory Retirement Of CISF Inspector; Rejects 'Washed-Off Theory' For Past Adverse Entries Revenue Cannot Vivisect Indivisible Turnkey Contracts For Service Tax Without Express Statutory Authority: Supreme Court Upholds CESTAT Ruling Violation of Article 14: Supreme Court Holds Civil Courts Have Jurisdiction Over Disputes Between Exclusively Non-Tribal Parties in Scheduled Areas, Declares 'Nagarjuna' Not Binding Precedent Allahabad High Court Upholds Magistrate's Power To Grant Interim Child Custody Under DV Act, Says It Overrides Family Courts Act" Section 50 NDPS Act Not Applicable To Search Of Bag Carried By Accused; Minor Discrepancies Cannot Vitiate Conviction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Female Relatives Of Prime Accused Not Directly Involved In Ponzi Operations Entitled To Bail Under Section 480 BNSS Proviso Despite Economic Offence: Orissa High Court 'Unlawful Assembly Must Be PROVED, Not Assumed': MP High Court Quashes Murder Convictions After Prosecution Fails To Establish Five-Person Prerequisite Section 70 Contract Act | Co-Owners Not Liable To Refund Advance Sale Consideration Unless Benefit Is Voluntarily Accepted: Kerala High Court Courts Cannot Grant Protection To Live-In Relationships Involving Minors As It Indirectly Sanctions Unlawful Arrangements: Punjab & Haryana High Court Parliament Introduces Bankers' Books Evidence Bill 2026 To Shield Banks From Unwarranted Third-Party Litigation Summons Statutorily Prohibiting Banks From Levying Charges On UPI Transactions - Parliament Passes Taxation And Other Laws (Amendment) Act 2026

Filing False Complaints Against Spouse Is Mental Cruelty Warranting Divorce — Supreme Court Affirms Separation After 26 Years of Discord

12 September 2025 4:24 PM

By: sayum


“A Father Cannot Shirk the Modest Duty of Funding His Daughter’s Marriage …..Meeting the reasonable expenses of his daughter’s marriage is a natural extension of his duty as a parent, irrespective of differences with the spouse." —  Today, On September 12, 2025, the Supreme Court of India finally brought closure to a 26-year-old embittered matrimonial saga by affirming the husband’s divorce on the ground of mental cruelty and directing him to pay ₹10,00,000 towards the marriage expenses of the daughter, stating that his parental responsibility continues regardless of marital hostility.

The Court reiterated that false accusations and repeated police complaints lodged by one spouse against another constitute “mental cruelty” sufficient to grant divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and added that a parent’s legal and moral duty towards a child does not dissolve with the marriage.

"Marriage, in this case, was nothing but a long-standing battlefield" — Supreme Court observes irreversible breakdown of relationship

The marriage, solemnized in May 1996, produced two children—a daughter and a son. However, by 2009, the husband had approached the Family Court seeking divorce on grounds of cruelty, narrating a long-standing pattern of mental torture by his wife, including persistent allegations and police complaints. The wife, on the other hand, countered with claims of domestic violence and physical abuse.

In a parallel proceeding under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, she initially received monthly maintenance and later succeeded in obtaining a compensation order of ₹7 lakhs, after the High Court enhanced the earlier award of ₹2 lakhs. The husband's challenge to that award was dismissed by the Supreme Court in March 2023.

The Family Court eventually granted divorce in September 2019, which was affirmed by the Delhi High Court in December 2023, observing that the wife’s repeated false complaints and police interventions had created an atmosphere of unresolvable acrimony, thereby amounting to mental cruelty.

The High Court remarked: “The parties have been in constant acrimony since the inception of their marriage… Lodging false complaints amounts to cruelty.”

“Even after a divorce, a parent’s obligation to the child remains” — Supreme Court balances law with human responsibility

Before the Supreme Court, the wife chose not to reopen the issue of divorce but limited her prayer to a one-time contribution of ₹10 lakhs from the husband towards the upcoming marriage of their daughter. She contended that the husband had income from business and rental properties, while the husband maintained that he had no earnings whatsoever.

The Court, however, found merit in her claim and observed: “We are satisfied that the respondent is capable of making provision for his daughter’s marriage.”

While accepting that the marital relationship had “ceased to exist in substance” and attempts at reconciliation had failed, the Court acknowledged the mother’s solitary role in raising both children, adding:

“The appellant-wife has raised and supported both children largely on her own. It is a father’s duty to provide for his children, and meeting the marriage expenses of his daughter is a modest obligation.”

The Bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, did not hesitate in enforcing this moral and legal responsibility upon the husband. It directed:

“The respondent-husband is directed to pay an amount of ₹10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) to the appellant-wife towards the marriage expenses of their daughter on or before 15th October 2025.”

The Court also inserted a compliance safeguard: “In case of default, the Registry shall revive these appeals for further consideration and appropriate orders.”

It also instructed the wife to furnish her bank details for smooth transaction of the ordered amount.

False Allegations May End a Marriage, But Parenthood Is a Lifelong Contract

While affirming the decree of divorce, the Court went a step further to assert that parenthood is not dependent on the success or failure of a marriage. In explicitly holding that a father is bound to support his daughter’s wedding despite estrangement from the spouse, the Supreme Court reinforced that emotional duties cannot be escaped by legal severance.

“Meeting the reasonable expenses of his daughter’s marriage is a natural extension of his duty as a parent, irrespective of differences with the spouse.”

The judgment stands as a dual pronouncement of law and conscience — that false accusations in matrimonial life are fatal to its survival, and that parental duties cannot be outsourced to acrimony.

Date of Decision: September 12, 2025

Latest Legal News