The Supreme Court on Monday granted divorce to an estranged couple, saying their prolonged separation, with no hope of reconciliation, amounts to cruelty to both the parties. A bench of Justices Manmohan and Joymalya Bagchi said the couple, who got married on August 4, 2000, had initiated the case in 2003 just two years later and had been living separately for 24 years due to irreconcilable differences.
‘No reconciliation despite efforts’
The bench observed that despite repeated attempts by the court, no settlement could be reached between the two parties. The Bench said that this Court has seen in many cases situations where the parties have been living separately for a long period of time, and has consistently held that separation for a long period without any hope of reconciliation amounts to cruelty to both the parties. The Supreme Court said, “This Court also agrees that prolongation of matrimonial disputes reduces the marriage to a mere paper formality. In such cases, where the litigation has been going on for a considerable period of time, it is in the interest of the parties and the society that the relationship be brought to an end.” The bench further said, “Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that no benefit would be served by keeping the matrimonial suit pending in the Court without granting relief to the parties.” The Supreme Court, using its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, ordered the dissolution of the marriage of this Shillong couple.
It upheld the order of the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Shillong, and set aside the High Court order which had restored the marriage on the basis of the wife’s plea that she had no intention of permanently abandoning or abandoning her husband. The Bench observed that in this case, the husband and wife had strong views regarding their approach to marital life and had refused to reconcile with each other for a long time. The bench said, ‘Their behavior towards each other amounts to cruelty.’
“As a result, their behavior towards each other amounts to cruelty. This Court is of the opinion that in matrimonial matters involving two persons, it is not the job of the society or the Court to decide whose view is right or wrong. Their very refusal to accommodate each other amounts to cruelty towards each other.”
