CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness Employee Cannot Switch Cadre At His Sweet Will After Accepting Promotion: J&K High Court Rejects Claim For Retrospective Assistant Registrar Appointment Anticipatory Bail Cannot Expire With Charge-Sheet: Supreme Court Reiterates Liberty Is Not Bound by Procedural Milestones Order II Rule 2 Cannot Eclipse Amendment Power Under Order VI Rule 17: MP High Court Refuses to Stall Will-Based Title Suit Grounds of Arrest Must Be Personal, Not Formal – But Detailed Allegations Suffice: Kerala High Court Upholds Arrest in Sabarimala Gold Misappropriation Case Grounds of Arrest Are Not a Ritual – They Are a Constitutional Mandate Under Article 22(1): Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Arrest for Non-Supply of Written Grounds Sect. 25 NDPS | Mere Ownership Cannot Fasten NDPS Liability – ‘Knowingly Permits’ Must Be Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt: MP High Court Section 308 CrPC | Revocation of Pardon Is Not Automatic on Prosecutor’s Certificate: Karnataka High Court Joint Family and Ancestral Property Are Alien to Mohammedan Law: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Injunction Right to Health Cannot Wait for Endless Consultations: Supreme Court Pulls Up FSSAI Over Delay in Front-of-Pack Warning Labels If A Son Dies Intestate Leaving Wife And Children, The Mother Has No Share: Karnataka High Court

However Dark the Past May Be, It Cannot Hold the Future Captive: Supreme Court Orders IPS Officer to Tender Public Apology in Divorce Settlement

23 July 2025 12:53 PM

By: sayum


In an extraordinary move aimed at achieving “complete justice” and emotional closure, the Supreme Court of India invoked its plenary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to dissolve the marriage between an IPS officer Shivangi Bansal and her estranged husband Sahib Bansal, and ordered the publication of an unconditional apology from the wife to the husband and his family across national newspapers and social media.

The apology, dictated word-for-word by the Court, is to appear in one national English and one Hindi daily, and also be circulated through platforms like Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and others, reflecting the Court’s emphasis on public closure after a long-drawn-out legal battle. In words crafted to heal, the apology begins:

“I, Shivangi Bansal/Shivangi Goel… hereby sincerely apologise… I sincerely hope that this apology can be a step towards finding some peace and closure for all of us.”

The Court observed: “The expression of apology herein shall not be construed as an admission of liability… and shall not ever be used against [her] before any Court or Authority.”

This deeply personal and publicly mandated act was part of a comprehensive settlement between the parties, which included the quashing of all 25+ litigations, mutual waiver of maintenance and property rights, and a commitment never to initiate litigation or interfere in each other’s lives again.

The apex court’s ruling came in the context of multiple transfer petitions and special leave petitions filed by both sides, each alleging harassment, filing criminal cases against the other, and involving extended family members in a spiral of accusations. With emotions, reputations, and liberty all having been placed on the line, the parties finally opted for a comprehensive settlement.

“The Child Is at No Fault Whatsoever”: Custody Granted to Mother, Father Gets Structured Visitation

The couple married on 5th December 2015 and had a daughter, Raina, in 2016. After a separation in 2018, the child had been living with the mother. The Court, while recognizing this status quo, ruled:

“It is hereby ordered that the mother shall have the custody of the child… The father, Sahib Bansal and his family shall have supervised visitation rights…”

Importantly, the Court laid down a detailed structure for these visits, including monthly meetings and shared vacation time, but warned:

“Neither of the parties shall, in any manner, create any hindrance or impediment in the visitation rights.”

“No Order for Maintenance Is Being Passed”: Wife Waives All Claims to Alimony and Property

In a rare but voluntary move, the wife, an IPS officer, declared that she would not seek any financial support from her husband:

“The Wife has voluntarily agreed to forgo and waive her claim to any alimony or maintenance… and shall have no claim over any moveable and immoveable property…”

She also undertook to bear all expenses for raising their daughter, leading the Court to quash the Allahabad High Court’s prior direction to the husband to pay ₹1.5 lakh per month in child support.

“Let the Past Not Hold the Future Captive”: Apex Court Quashes All Cases Filed by Either Side

The bench took decisive action to halt the legal war, stating:

“To bring an end to the protracted legal battle… all pending criminal and civil litigations… are hereby quashed and/or withdrawn.”

The Court invoked Article 142 to wipe out an extraordinary list of proceedings—ranging from domestic violence cases and dowry harassment FIRs to defamation complaints and custody battles—that had been filed not only by the couple but also by and against their relatives. The Court added sternly:

“If any such proceeding is found to be initiated or pending at a later stage, the same would be tantamount to contempt of this Hon'ble Court.”

“Unconditional Apology Must Be Published in National Newspapers and Social Media”: A Rare and Public Gesture of Closure

As part of the final terms of settlement, the Supreme Court directed the wife to tender an unconditional public apology to the husband and his family for the trauma caused by the litigation. The apology, as dictated by the Court, was to be published in one national English and one Hindi newspaper, and on all major social media platforms.

The Court provided the exact text of the apology, which included: “I sincerely hope that this apology can be a step towards finding some peace and closure for all of us… However dark the past may be, it cannot hold the future captive.”

Importantly, the Court made clear that this apology: “Shall not be construed as an admission of liability… It is without prejudice and shall not ever be used against [her] before any Court or Authority.”

“No More Complaints, No More Litigation, No More Harm”: Both Parties Barred from Interfering in Each Other’s Life and Career

Recognizing the professional vulnerabilities of an IPS officer, the Court directed: “Shivangi Bansal shall never use her position and power as an IPS officer… against the husband, his Family Members and Relatives… in any manner whatsoever.”

Further, the Court imposed a permanent injunction on both parties from initiating any future legal proceedings, declaring: “Default on the part of any party will amount to contempt giving a right to the other party to directly approach this Court.”

“We Invoke Our Powers Under Article 142”: Marriage Dissolved by Supreme Court

The Court concluded with a definitive invocation of its constitutional authority: “We deem it appropriate to invoke our power under Article 142… and order for dissolution of marriage between Shivangi Bansal and Sahib Bansal.”

In doing so, the Court also expunged adverse remarks made earlier by the Allahabad High Court against the wife and granted police protection to the husband and his family.

In closing the final chapter of this bitter marital saga, the Court underscored its message of reconciliation and emotional healing, not just legal closure.

Date of Decision: 22 July 2025

 

Latest Legal News