Prolonged Separation Of Sixteen Years Constitutes Cruelty Under Special Marriage Act: Kerala High Court Grants Divorce

"It is well settled that prolonged separation, in the circumstances of a particular case, may itself amount to cruelty to the spouse." Kerala High Court, in a significant ruling dated September 24, 2026, held that a prolonged separation lasting over sixteen years between spouses constitutes mental cruelty, warranting a decree of divorce under the Special Marriage Act.

A division bench of Justice Sathish Ninan and Justice P. Krishna Kumar observed that when a marital relationship has reached a point where there is no remote chance of reunion, compelling the parties to remain tethered to the marriage serves no purpose and amounts to cruelty.

The appellant-husband and respondent-wife were married in 2008 under the Special Marriage Act, both being in their second marriage. The couple lived together briefly in New Zealand before the husband returned to Kerala in May 2010, after which they remained separated for over 16 years. While the husband sought a decree of nullity or divorce alleging cruelty and non-consummation, the Family Court dismissed his petition, citing a lack of evidence regarding his allegations of ill-treatment.

The primary question before the court was whether the petitioner-husband was entitled to a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. The court was further tasked with determining whether a prolonged period of separation, coupled with the absence of any meaningful attempt to restore the marital bond, satisfies the legal threshold of cruelty as envisaged under the Special Marriage Act.

Cruelty Through Prolonged Separation

The bench emphasized that the parties have been living apart since May 2010, a duration exceeding 16 years. The court noted that while the respondent-wife had issued a legal notice in 2014 requesting the resumption of cohabitation, she took no concrete legal steps such as filing a petition for restitution of conjugal rights. The court found this omission significant in assessing the viability of the marriage.

Court Explains Legal Precedents on Cruelty

The court relied on a consistent line of judicial precedents to establish that the breakdown of a marriage due to long-term separation constitutes mental cruelty. Referencing landmark judgments, the bench observed that when a marriage has been reduced to a hollow shell, continuing the legal bond causes psychological distress to the parties involved.

"It is well settled that prolonged separation, in the circumstances of a particular case, may itself amount to cruelty to the spouse."

Absence of Hope for Reconciliation

The bench highlighted that despite efforts made during the pendency of the appeal to facilitate mediation at the High Court’s Family Counselling Centre, the parties could not arrive at an amicable settlement. This failure confirmed the court’s assessment that there was not even a remote chance of reconciliation between the couple.

Failure of Marital Ties

The court underscored that the parties had cohabited for only approximately one year out of their 18-year legal relationship. Observing that the marriage had irretrievably broken down, the judges concluded that keeping the decree of divorce denied would only prolong the suffering of the parties without any possibility of a functional marital life.

Finding that the circumstances sufficiently established mental cruelty, the Court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the Family Court. The marriage between the appellant and the respondent stands dissolved by a decree of divorce, bringing finality to a litigation that spanned over a decade.

Date of Decision: 24 September 2026