Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Court | Supreme Court of India |
| Case Number | Crl.A. No.-001595-001595 – 2025 |
| Diary Number | 48594/2023 |
| Judge Name | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH |
| Bench | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA; HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA |
| Concurring or Dissenting Judges | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA (concurring) |
| Precedent Value | Binding Authority |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms Supreme Court’s plenary power under Article 142 of the Constitution |
| Type of Law | Family Law / Constitutional Jurisdiction |
| Questions of Law |
|
| Ratio Decidendi |
|
| Facts as Summarised by the Court |
|
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Supreme Court exercised Article 142 to grant a decree of divorce based on irretrievable breakdown, even over one spouse’s objection.
- Divorce granted after failed mediation at the Supreme Court Mediation Centre, demonstrating finality where reconciliation efforts collapse.
- Permanent alimony fixed at Rs. 1 crore as full and final settlement of all claims between the parties, including the minor child’s dues.
- All pending civil and criminal proceedings arising out of the marriage are quashed upon compliance, streamlining finality.
- Child’s right to further education contributions remains open despite the full settlement, preserving welfare interests.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The parties have lived separately for over fifteen years, and mediation efforts did not succeed, establishing irretrievable breakdown.
- Article 142 of the Constitution grants the Supreme Court plenary power to do “complete justice,” including dissolving marriages when no matrimonial bond survives.
- In fixing permanent alimony, the Court considered both parties’ incomes, financial standings, and attendant circumstances to arrive at a just and reasonable figure.
- The Court held that a final settlement of all claims may be achieved through a global alimony award, subject to preserving the minor child’s future educational needs.
- Upon payment of the alimony, all pending civil and criminal proceedings related to the marriage are quashed and closed, ensuring comprehensive closure.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner (Appellant-Wife):
- Challenged the High Court’s dismissal of her revision petition seeking rights of residence and maintenance.
- Contested the grant of divorce, wishing to preserve the matrimonial bond.
Respondent (Husband):
- Sought dismissal of maintenance claims and revision of orders under Section 125 CrPC and DV Act.
- Offered Rs. 1 crore under Article 142 as permanent alimony and full settlement in lieu of all claims, and moved to dissolve the marriage.
Factual Background
The parties married in October 2009, but within six months the wife left alleging mental and physical harassment, and gave birth in December 2010. She filed maintenance applications under Section 125 CrPC (July 2013) and the DV Act (January 2019), leading to trial-court awards of maintenance, compensation, and child custody. Appeals and revision petitions before the High Court partially set aside these orders, dismissing her petition and reducing compensation. The Supreme Court directed payment of arrears, then considered the husband’s offer of Rs. 1 crore and—finding the marriage irretrievably broken after failed mediation—used Article 142 to dissolve it and quash all related proceedings.
Statutory Analysis
- Article 142, Constitution of India: Empowers the Supreme Court to do “complete justice,” including granting reliefs beyond conventional jurisdiction, here used to dissolve marriage and quash proceedings.
- Section 125, CrPC: Provides for maintenance to wife and minor children; earlier orders under this section were directed but later set aside.
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005:
- Section 21: Grants custody of the minor child to the aggrieved person.
- Section 22: Awards compensation for mental, emotional, and physical suffering.
- The judgment applies these provisions but primarily turns on Article 142 to conclude all disputes.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
Justice Sandeep Mehta concurred fully with Justice Vikram Nath’s reasoning, agreeing on the use of Article 142 for dissolution and the quantification of permanent alimony.
Procedural Innovations
- First use of Article 142 in a criminal appeal to grant a divorce decree and quash all related civil and criminal proceedings arising from the marriage.
- Establishes a standalone mechanism for finalizing matrimonial disputes at the Supreme Court level upon settlement offers.
Alert Indicators
- 🚨 Breaking Precedent – Extends Article 142 relief to dissolution of marriage under Supreme Court’s plenary powers.