Case Details Smt. Roopa Soni vs Kamalnarayan Soni

Court

Supreme Court of India

Date

6 September 2023

Case No.

Civil Appeal No. 5700 of 2023

Result

Allowed

Bench

Sanjiv Khanna, M.M. Sundresh

Citation

[2023] 14 S.C.R. 871 : 2023 INSC 814

Issue for consideration

Whether the trial Court and High Court were justified in adopting a hyper-technical and pedantic approach in declining the decree of divorce, when both the parties had made serious allegations against each other and were living separately for decade and half. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – The appellant-wife registered a complaint u/s. 498A of IPC and ss.3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 – The respondent-Husband had questioned the character of the appellant-wife – Petition for divorce – Trial Court and the High Court declined decree of divorce – Propriety:

Headnote

Held: For a decade and half, the parties have been living separately – The marriage does not survive any longer, and the relationship was terminated otherwise except by a formal decree of divorce – The Trial Court and the High Court adopted a hyper-technical and pedantic approach in declining the decree of divorce – It is not as if the respondent-husband is willing to live with the appellant-wife – The allegations made by him against her are as serious as the allegations made by her against him – Both the parties have moved away and settled in their respective lives – There is no need to continue the agony of a mere status without them living together – The judgment of the Trial Court as confirmed by the High Court set aside. [Paras 17, 19, 20]

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – s.13(1)(ia) – Cruelty:

Held: The word ‘cruelty’ under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Act of 1955 has got no fixed meaning, and therefore, gives a very wide discretion to the Court to apply it liberally and contextually – What is cruelty in one case may not be the same for another – It has to be applied from person to person while taking note of the attending circumstances. [Para 5] Divorce – Bipin Chander Jaisinghbhai Shah v. Prabhawati – Clarification of decision:

Held: The decision rendered in Bipin Chander Jaisinghbhai Shah v. Prabhawati, 1956 SCR 838 is clarified, it is not a proposition to hold that the proof required from a petitioner in a matrimonial case alleging cruelty is of beyond reasonable doubt, and not of preponderance of probability – The Court in Bipin Chander was dealing with a case of desertion, and therefore, more onus was fixed on the person who asserts it – The Court is not deciding and adjudicating an offence, when a petition for divorce is a civil remedy. [Para 12]

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – s. 23 – Decree in proceedings – Discussed. [Paras 13, 14]

Divorce – Socio-economic stigma and issues attached to woman – Discussed. [Para 8]

LIST OF CITATIONS AND OTHER REFERENCES

Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan 2023 (6) SCALE 402 – followed. Vishwanath Agrawal v. Sarla Vishwanath Agrawal (2012) 7 SCC

288 : [2012] 7 SCR 607; Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse and Another (2014) 1 SCC 188 : [2013] 10 SCR 259; N.G. Dastane v. Mrs. S. Dastane (1975) 2 SCC 326 : [1975] 3 SCR 967; Sivasankaran v. Santhimeenal 2021

JUDGMENT / ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT M. M. SUNDRESH, J. Leave granted. 2. Section 13(1) and 13(1A) of theHindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as Act of 1955) provide for various grounds for granting divorce: “13. Divorce.—(1) Any marriage solemnized, whether before or after the commencement of this Act, may, on a petition presented by either the husband or the wife, be dissolved by a decree of divorce on the ground that the other party— (i) has, after the solemnization of the marriage, had voluntary sexual intercourse with any person other than his or her spouse; o

View Subscription Plans →