Last Updated:
The court, noting that the couple lived together for just 6 months, said compelling them to reside together after the prolonged separation would ‘inflict further mental cruelty’
The court said the very essence of marriage stands eroded when either spouse chooses to live apart for over three decades “without even a show of reconciliation or cohabitation”.
“When a marriage has broken down, lost all vitality and become nothing more than a dead formality, insisting upon reunion would not only be futile but also amount to prolonging the suffering of both the parties”—the dialogue is not from a Bollywood flick but an empathetic observation by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which recently granted divorce to a couple living separately since 1994.
The Division Bench of Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill and Justice Deepinder Singh Nalwa, while dissolving the couple’s marriage dating back to 1986, said the very essence of marriage stands eroded when either spouse chooses to live apart for over three decades “without even a show of reconciliation or cohabitation”, Bar and Bench reported.
Recommended Stories
“What remains is only a legal bond without any substance. To compel the parties to reside together after such a prolonged separation would be unrealistic and in fact, would inflict further mental cruelty on both sides,” the court said.
RECAPPING THE CASE
According to the report, the husband had filed a divorce plea in 2016, which was rejected by a family court in Amritsar in 2020. The man had earlier too filed for divorce in 1996, but the appeal was struck down in 1999.
The husband had argued that his wife left for her parental home in 1987 and refused to return despite repeated attempts at reconciliation. Eventually, she came back in September 1993 but allegedly refused to develop a physical relationship with him, permanently leaving him in 1994.
It was argued that the couple had lived together only for six months and their relationship was extremely strained due to the wife’s alleged wrongful conduct.
The wife, however, claimed harassment and filed maintenance proceedings against the husband. Accusing her husband of marrying for the second time and having two children, the wife also filed a criminal complaint. She also alleged that due to the atrocities committed by the husband and his family members, she had suffered a miscarriage.
When the Punjab and Haryana High Court asked the wife to consider settlement as the husband was undergoing prostate cancer, she declined. The court, noting the irretrievable breakdown in ties, said though it bears the solemn duty to safeguard the sanctity of marriage, “this obligation cannot be stretched to compel the continuation of a relationship that had become wholly unworkable and devoid of substance”.
Setting aside the family court judgment, the court also granted the wife the liberty to approach the family court for permanent alimony.
About the Author
The News Desk is a team of passionate editors and writers who break and analyse the most important events unfolding in India and abroad. From live updates to exclusive reports to in-depth explainers, the Desk d…Read More
The News Desk is a team of passionate editors and writers who break and analyse the most important events unfolding in India and abroad. From live updates to exclusive reports to in-depth explainers, the Desk d… Read More
Loading comments…
Read More
