Overview
In the prominent judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court where the court invoked it’s most extraordinary authority as granted under Article 142 of the Constitution that is to dissolve marriage of a disaffectate couple, forming the basis that their legal status has to be ceased and doesn’t serve any meaningful purpose to exist. This act of the SC showcases a rare judicial intervention i.e. granting relief in matrimonial disputes arising out of longed separation, seizure of conjugal rights, and rupturing of marital ties in totality. Finally the bench settled the marriage with a full and final settlement of rupees 1 crore permanent alimony.
Facts of the Case
The alleged couple was solemnized in 2009 having a progeny in 2010. During this time frame of 1 to 1 and half years the wife alleged that she was exposed for intense mental and physical harassment by her in laws. Subsequently, compelling her to abandon her matrimonial home in 2010 while she was conceived with their son, eventually delivering him in December 2010. Over years the wife settled at her parents home, initiating the couple’s separation which haunted both of them for more than fifteen years.
With the initiation of the separation, this also marked the beginning for their unforeseen martial dispute. The wife had pressed numerous charges against her husband and in-laws in various courts. In 2013 the wife petitioned for maintenance as granted under Section 125 of CrPC. In 20119 she again complained under the Prevention of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005. The case led to hearing numerous levels of courts beginning from the trial court which granted maintenance to the wife, sum of rupees 25000 monthly which meant to incur multiple expenses such as mother and child care, utilities etc., along with compensation of 4 lakh rupees for emotional and mental distress. Additionally the family court added a 3000 rupees monthly allowance. Concurrently when appealed in the High Court of Rajasthan, it quashed the compensation allowance and set aside the maintenance order.
Supreme Court’s Analysis and Decision
On contrary to the Rajasthan High Court’s order, the wife approached the SC challenging the High Court’s decision. During the SC proceeding the court finally settled the case full and finally with an alimony of rupees 1 crore by invoking the provision of Article 142 of the constitution. The SC also made multiple attempts to reconcile through the Supreme Court Mediation Centre, but failed due to the intense magnitude of the separation.
The bench noticed that the relationship between the husband and wife has “irretrievably broken down” and since then they lived separately since 2010. Though wife made multiple attempts for contestation for divorce, the court found that “no marital bonds existed ” therefore no use in continuing the relationship. Therefore maintaining the relation wasn’t justified and became devoid of meaning.
Legal Significance and Relief Granted
The SC by enforcing it’s powers under the article 142 of the constitution to dissolve and solemnized the marriage, recognising as the complete justice to the marriage. Upon analysation the court settled a full and a final settlement for Rs.1 crore in form of permanent alimony and reasonable for settlement. They settled for both the wife and the child position. The court clarified that the this alimony doesn’t stop the father from paying the educational fees of the child and fulfil his financial requirements.
Conclusion
This order fortified the alimony provisions of previously broken down marriages beyond the scope of reconciliation. The court prioritized the human dignity and reasonable suffering in the marital relationship especially in the matters involving extended time of prolonged separation and failed reconciliation attempts.
Authored By
Atharva Gajanan Jakkalwar, a 2nd year student pursuing his B.A., LL.B. degree at the Maharashtra National Law University Mumbai, is a committed scholar of legal studies. With a focused interest in Constitutional Law, Jurisprudence, and Election Law, Atharva actively engages with complex legal principles and the practical applications of law, establishing himself as a keen observer and an aspiring legal analyst.