Statutory Grounds May Fail, But Not Justice: Supreme Court Dissolves Marriage Under Article 142 for Irretrievable Breakdown

“When a Marriage is Emotionally Dead and Reconciliation Is Impossible, There Is No Justification in Refusing Divorce”, - Supreme Court of India exercised its constitutional powers under Article 142 to dissolve a Hindu marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown, setting aside concurrent findings of the Family Court and the Patna High Court which had refused divorce for lack of statutory grounds under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

The Court ruled: “Even though the respondent-husband has vehemently opposed the prayer for dissolution of marriage, the same is not a bar for us to exercise our powers under Article 142 of the 

Constitution of India to do complete justice.” “We are satisfied that it is a case of irretrievable breakdown of marriage. The prolonged period of separation and the multiple failed attempts at reconciliation clearly indicate that there is no possibility of reunion.”

“Marriage Has Lost Its Soul – Courts Should Not Insist on a Hollow Shell of Matrimony”
The appellant-wife and respondent-husband were married on April 24, 1999. A daughter was born on June 7, 2001, but the couple had been living separately since at least 2008 — a period of over twelve years.

The wife approached the Family Court in Munger, Bihar, seeking divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, citing cruelty and mental agony due to abandonment and neglect. Simultaneously, the husband filed for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9. The Family Court dismissed the wife’s plea and allowed the husband’s, effectively compelling restoration of conjugal life.

On June 4, 2020, the Patna High Court affirmed this finding. However, the Supreme Court found this approach legally flawed and emotionally blind.
“There is no justification in perpetuating a marriage which has become a mere legal fiction... The couple has been living separately for more than twelve years, and even their daughter has never known them as a cohesive family unit.”

“Complete Justice Under Article 142 Overrides Technical Failures Under Statute”
Responding to the husband's objection that no statutory ground under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act had been established, the Court invoked the authoritative precedent in Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 544, where a Constitution Bench had recognised the power of the Supreme Court to dissolve marriages on the ground of irretrievable breakdown — even in the absence of statutory backing.
“The failure to establish statutory grounds does not limit this Court’s authority to grant relief where equity, good conscience, and the imperative of justice so demand.”

It added: “A mechanical insistence on statutory thresholds would only prolong the misery of parties locked in dead relationships, devoid of affection, companionship, or shared purpose.”

“Emotional Argument Cannot Override the Inevitable – Daughter’s Wellbeing Not a Ground to Deny Divorce”
The respondent-husband argued that the grant of divorce might jeopardize the future prospects of their daughter. The Court found this to be a specious contention, pointing out that the husband had had no relationship or contact with the daughter for over a decade.
“We are not impressed by this submission… This appears to be a mere attempt to prolong the litigation and stall the inevitable.”
“The daughter is an adult, a medical student, and capable of understanding the realities of her parents’ separation. In fact, she has never seen them together.”

The Court interacted with the daughter, found her mature and resolute, and recorded that both parties had accepted her custody and care under the exclusive guardianship of the mother.

By exercising its plenary powers under Article 142, the Supreme Court granted a decree of divorce and extinguished a marriage that had, in reality, ended years ago. The wife had not sought alimony, and thus, no financial orders were made.
“It would be in the best interest of both the parties, and their daughter too, to put a quietus to this protracted litigation. It is our hope that this quietus allows all members of the family to move on in life.”

In doing so, the Court sent a clear message: marriage without mutual respect, companionship, and emotional connection is not worthy of legal preservation, and courts must not become instruments of psychological imprisonment.

Date of Decision: May 6, 2025