Long separation between husband and wife amounts to cruelty: SC

The Supreme Court noted that the estranged couple got married in August 2000, entered into matrimonial litigation in 2003, and have been living separately since then

The Supreme Court on Monday held that a long period of separation between a husband and wife, without any possibility of reconciliation, amounts to cruelty to both parties, and dissolved the marriage of a couple who had been living apart for nearly 24 years, LiveLaw reported.

 

The bench observed that despite repeated efforts by the court, reconciliation between the spouses was not possible.

 

“This Court is also of the view that pendency of matrimonial litigation for a long duration only leads to perpetuity of marriage on paper. It is in the best interest of the parties and society if ties are severed between parties in cases where litigation has been pending for a considerably long period of time,” the court said.

 

It added that no useful purpose would be served by continuing matrimonial litigation without granting relief.

Background of the case

 

A two-judge bench of Justices Manmohan and Joymalya Bagchi noted that the couple married in August 2000 but separated within a year due to differences in their approach to matrimonial life.

 

The husband first approached the court in 2003, but his petition was dismissed as premature. In 2007, he filed a fresh petition seeking divorce on the ground of desertion.

 

In 2011, the Gauhati High Court reversed the trial court’s decree, holding that the wife had a reasonable cause to leave the matrimonial home and that the husband could not take advantage of his own alleged wrongdoing. The husband subsequently challenged the High Court’s order before the Supreme Court.

What the Supreme Court held

 

Setting aside the High Court’s ruling, Justice Manmohan said the focus on fixing blame was misplaced when the spouses had lived separately for nearly 24 years and had no children from the marriage.

 

The court held that such prolonged separation itself amounted to mutual cruelty, making it irrelevant to determine which spouse was at fault.

 

“In the case at hand, spouses have strongly held views with regard to the approach towards matrimonial life and they have refused to accommodate each other for a long period of time. Consequently, their conduct amounts to cruelty to each other,” the court said.

 

Invoking its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to do “complete justice”, the apex court ordered dissolution of the marriage, observing that courts should not sit in judgment over whose approach to marriage was correct when both parties had irretrievably drifted apart.