oppn parties Divorce Is The Best Option For Irretrievable Broken Down Marriages

News Snippets

  • Maratha quota bill likely to be tabled in Maharashtra assembly today
  • Arvind Kejriwal skips ED summons for the 6th time, says the case is in court and will follow court's decision
  • PM Modi says UP has gone from 'red tape' to 'red carpet' in 7 years of 'double engine' government
  • Farm unions reject government offers, to resume Delhi march from today
  • Centre says some Aadhar cards in Bengal 'deactivated' due to technical glitz, will be activated back soon
  • Supreme Court stays LS privilege panel summons to Bengal officials over BJP MP Sukanta Majumdar injury case
  • Supreme Court junks Sandeshkhali petition, says it cannot be compared to Manipur, asks petitioner to approach Calcutta HC
  • Supreme Court gets tough on Chandigarh mayoral elections, asks for ballot papers and video footage, does not order re-election
  • Government starts withdrawing old small tax demands, up to Rs 25000 per entry till FY 2009-10 and up to Rs 10000 per entry from FY 2010-11 to FY 2014-15 with an overall ceiling of Rs 1 lakh per tax payer
  • Stocks remained positive on Monday: Sensex gained 281 points to 72708 and Nifty 81 points to 22122
  • Jasprit Bumrah likely to be rested for 4th Test while K L Rahul may be back
  • FIH Pro League hockey: India beat Spain 8-7 in shootout
  • SP leader Salim Sherwani, miffed at no Muslim candidate given RS ticket, quits party
  • Army going for big (Rs 57000cr) upgrade in combat vehicles to replace T-72 tanks
  • Mamata Banerjee says the BJP is doing nothing to resolve the Sandeshkhali dispute but instead fanning the fires to escalate it
History created in Supreme Court as Chandigarh mayoral poll ballots counted in court, judges declare AAP candidate Kuldeep Kumar winner after taking into account the votes defaced by returning officer Anil Masih
oppn parties
Divorce Is The Best Option For Irretrievable Broken Down Marriages

By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2022-01-11 13:46:06

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator.

In line with earlier judicial orders, a division bench of the Punjab & Haryana HC has once again reiterated that if a marriage has broken irretrievably, it is wrong to think that judicial intervention can set it right. The court said that since marriage involves "human sentiments and emotions", their drying up offers little chance of them springing back to life "on account of artificial reunion created by court decree", expressing the same logic as used in K Srinivasa Rao vs D A Deepa by the Supreme Court in 2013. 

This position has been stated in earlier judgments too, more specifically by the Madras HC in Salome vs Dr. Prince D. Immanuel. In that judgment, the court had cited K Srinivasa Rao vs D A Deepa, Naveen Kolhi vs Neelu Kolhi, Durga Prasanna Tripathy vs Arundhati Tripathy and Manisha Tyagi vs Deepak Kumar and other cases to conclude that although irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not a ground for divorce the Supreme Court has repeatedly invoked its special powers under Article 142 of the constitution to render complete justice to the parties in such cases.

The Supreme Court had, in Reynold Rajamani and another vs Union of India and another, held that "over the decades, a more liberal attitude has been adopted, fostered by a recognition of the need for the individual happiness of the adult parties directly involved. But although the grounds for divorce have been liberalised, they nevertheless continue to form an exception to the general principle favouring the continution of the marital tie. In our opinion, when a legislative provision specifies the grounds on which divorce may be granted they constitute the only conditions on which the court has jurisdiction to grant divorce. If grounds need to be added to those already specifically set forth in the legislation that is the business of the Legislature and not of the courts. It is another matter that in construing the language in which the grounds are incorporated the courts should give a liberal construction to it. Indeed, we think that the courts must give the fullest amplitude of meaning to such a provision. But it must be meaning which the language of the section is capable of holding. It cannot' be extended by adding new grounds not enumerated in the section."

When it is abundantly clear that the parties to the marriage union, either one or both, are no longer interested in continuing with the union and are bent on creating circumstances that lead to making life hell for the other, it is best for courts to grant then a divorce so that they can lead the rest of their lives happily. A failed marriage is a pain not only to the couple but also to their children and their families. Hence, it is better to end it if there is no hope of a reunion. Thus, although it is true that irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not a ground for divorce in the Indian Divorce Act, 1869, the legal thinking has veered towards granting divorce in such cases (some of which are involved in litigation for years) to end the misery.