Marital Dissolution in India in the light Article 142(1) of the Constitution -written by Poonam Chanchlani (BCA, Data Science)

In a significant verdict, the Supreme Court delved into the realm of granting divorce through Article 142(1) of the Constitution, shedding light on the waiving of the mandatory 6-month cooling-off period in mutual consent divorce cases. The apex court emphasized the cautious exercise of this power to avert the risks associated with a subjective approach.

 

The Constitution Bench, comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, A.S. Oka, Vikram Nath, and J.K. Maheshwari, elucidated that the Supreme Court possesses the discretionary power to dissolve a marriage via a mutual consent divorce decree . This discretion is not bound by the procedural requirement of a second motion, provided the conditions specified in the Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur (2017) 8 SCC 746 and Amit Kumar v. Suman Beniwal (2021 SCC OnLine SC 1270) cases are met.

 

The judgment clarified that parties cannot sidestep the established procedure by invoking writ jurisdiction under Article 32 or 226 of the Constitution to present the grounds of irretrievable breakdown directly before the Supreme Court. Evaluating such matters demands considering the parties' economic and social status, educational qualifications, and whether they have dependent children. The court emphasized that great care should be exercised, intervening only if substantial injustice is evident and exceptional circumstances are demonstrated. Statutory provisions should not be disregarded, nor decisions taken solely on compassionate grounds.

 

The ruling also underscores that divorce is perceived cautiously in Indian culture. The intricacies of the judgment highlight the delicate balance between upholding constitutional authority and safeguarding the sanctity of marriage within the cultural context.