Limitation Period For Specific Performance Starts From Date Of Refusal If No Fixed Date Stipulated In Agreement: Karnataka High Court Pensionary Benefits Not ‘Pecuniary Advantage’, Cannot Be Deducted From Income For Motor Accident Compensation: Punjab & Haryana High Court Propounder Faces Heavy Burden Of Proof When Testator Is Illiterate; Registration Does Not Cure Unexplained Suspicious Circumstances: Supreme Court Mother Killing Minor Children Over Husband's Refusal To Take Her To Workplace Is Murder, Not Culpable Homicide: Andhra Pradesh High Court Specific Performance Of Registered Agreement To Sell Is No Longer Discretionary Post-2018 Amendment: Allahabad High Court Civil Court Has Jurisdiction To Determine If Tenanted Property Belongs To Joint Family Even If Tenancy Order Stands In Individual Karta's Name: Bombay High Court Notice Under Section 107 BNSS Mandatory Before Attaching Property; Right To Property Is A Constitutional Right: Calcutta High Court Post-Cognizance Arrest 'Makes No Sense' If Investigation Completed Without Arrest: Delhi High Court Grants Bail Under BNSS Criminal Courts Cannot Be Used To Settle Civil Inheritance Disputes Over Appreciated Land Values: Gujarat High Court Quashes Fraud Case Accused Must Raise Probable Defence To Rebut Statutory Presumption Under Section 139 NI Act If Signatures Are Undisputed: Himachal Pradesh High Court Passing Departmental Exam Not A Pre-requisite For Grant Of ACP/MACP Benefits: Jharkhand High Court Convenience Of Family And Accused Paramount For Jail Shifting; Trial Court Can't Reject Application Merely For Non-Residency: J&K High Court Litigants Who Attempt To Pollute The Stream Of Justice With Tainted Hands Are Not Entitled To Any Relief: Karnataka High Court Trial Court Must Implement Modified Preliminary Decree In Full: Telangana High Court Directs Partition Of Property Omitted In Final Decree Proceedings If Grievance Is Real But Lies Before Different Forum, Plaint Should Be Returned Under Order VII Rule 10 CPC, Not Rejected: Rajasthan High Court Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Due To Severity Of Economic Offence If Evidence Is Documentary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Non-Compliance With Mandatory Duty To Inform Grounds Of Arrest Under Section 47 BNSS Is Impermissible: Orissa High Court Grants Bail Land Acquisition Award Finality Under Section 12 Is A Bar To Writ Petitions Challenging 'Public Necessity': Madhya Pradesh High Court State As Eminent Domain Is Obligated To Pay Adequate Compensation, Not Minimum To Suit Its Convenience: Madras High Court Kerala High Court Grants Emergency Parole To Life Convict To Execute Sale Deed, Repay Bank Loan To Prevent Family's Eviction High Court Cannot Act As Court Of First Instance In Service Matters Amenable To CAT Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court Election Tribunal Has No Jurisdiction To Declare Caste Certificate Forged, Authority Vests Solely With Scrutiny Committee: Allahabad High Court Order IX Rule 7 CPC Requires 'Good Cause' Not 'Sufficient Cause'; Trial Court Can't Apply Higher Threshold To Pre-Decree Proceedings: Telangana High Court Victim Cannot Maintain Appeal Seeking Enhancement Of Sentence Under Section 372 CrPC; Such Power Exclusively With State: Rajasthan High Court Disability Pension: Presumption In Favour Of Personnel If Found Fit At Enrollment; Percentage Must Be Rounded Off: Punjab & Haryana HC Employee Entitled To Second Kramonnati Benefit If Promotion To Higher Post Does Not Result In Higher Pay Scale: Madhya Pradesh High Court Borrowers Can Be Granted Opportunity To Clear Loan Overdues In Installments To Prevent Coercive Action Under SARFAESI Act: Kerala 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