The marriage between the parties, solemnised in 2012, survived only for a brief period, after which they began living separately. For more than thirteen years, the parties remained estranged and were involved in extensive litigation across various forums, including matrimonial, civil and criminal proceedings. Multiple attempts at reconciliation and mediation, including before the Supreme Court, failed to yield any settlement. The wife approached the Supreme Court seeking dissolution of marriage by invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, contending that the marriage had irretrievably broken down. The husband opposed the prayer and refused consent for divorce.The Supreme Court, after examining the length of separation, the conduct of parties and the futility of continuing the marital relationship, held that the marriage had completely and irretrievably broken down and had become a mere legal fiction. Relying upon its plenary powers under Article 142, the Court dissolved the marriage to do complete justice between the parties and to bring finality to the prolonged matrimonial dispute.
A) Family Law – Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Irretrievable breakdown of marriage – Long separation – Prolonged matrimonial litigation – Marriage solemnised in 2012 – Parties lived together only for a short period and have been living separately for more than 13 years – Multiple civil, criminal and matrimonial proceedings filed against each other – Mediation efforts including before Supreme Court failed – Wife sought dissolution of marriage invoking Article 142 – Husband opposed grant of divorce – Supreme Court examined factual matrix, length of separation and parties’ conduct – Found marriage to be completely dead and beyond salvage – Held that continuance of marriage would amount to sustaining a legal fiction – Marriage dissolved in exercise of plenary powers despite absence of irretrievable breakdown as a statutory ground (Paras 18–27).
B) Constitutional Law – Article 142 of Constitution of India – Exercise of power to do complete justice – Dissolution of marriage without mutual consent – Irretrievable breakdown not a ground under Hindu Marriage Act – Supreme Court reiterated its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 – Consent of both parties not sine qua non where marriage is wholly unworkable – Consideration of prolonged separation, bitter litigation and impossibility of reconciliation – Directions issued to bring quietus to all pending disputes – Held: Exercise of Article 142 power justified to secure just, equitable and complete justice in matrimonial disputes – Marriage dissolved accordingly (Paras 28–36).
The Supreme Court allowed the transfer petition, transferring the proceedings under Section 340 CrPC from Family Court, Delhi to Family Court, Lucknow, and dissolved the marriage between the parties under Article 142 of the Constitution of India on grounds of irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
Citation: 2026 LawText (SC) (01) 71
Case Number: Transfer Petition (Crl.) No.338 of 2025 with I.A.No.200539 of 2025
Date of Decision: 2026-01-20
Case Title: The Issue of Consideration was whether the Supreme Court should exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to dissolve the marriage between the parties on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown, and whether the transfer petition should be allowed
Before Judge: Rajesh Bindal J. , Manmohan J.
Equivalent Citations: 2026 INSC 73
Appellant: Neha Lal
Respondent: Abhishek Kumar
Nature of Litigation: Matrimonial dispute involving multiple criminal and civil cases, including applications for maintenance, divorce, domestic violence, and perjury proceedings
Remedy Sought: The petitioner-wife sought transfer of proceedings under Section 340 CrPC from Delhi to Lucknow and dissolution of marriage under Article 142 of the Constitution of India
Filing Reason: The petitioner filed the transfer petition due to hardship in traveling from Lucknow to Delhi, lack of maintenance, and frivolous cases by the respondent; she later sought divorce due to irretrievable breakdown of marriage
Previous Decisions: Various cases had been disposed of or dismissed, including a divorce case (HMA No.229/2017 dismissed on 04.04.2019), domestic violence cases, and maintenance applications; some cases were still pending
Issues: Whether the Supreme Court should exercise its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to dissolve the marriage on grounds of irretrievable breakdown Whether the transfer petition should be allowed to transfer the proceedings under Section 340 CrPC from Delhi to Lucknow
Submissions/Arguments: The petitioner argued that the marriage had irretrievably broken down due to prolonged separation since 02.04.2012 and multiple litigations, warranting divorce under Article 142 The respondent opposed the dissolution, alleging that the petitioner filed false cases, committed perjury, and was well-settled financially, while he faced harassment and had no resources
Ratio Decidendi: The Supreme Court can invoke its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to dissolve a marriage on grounds of irretrievable breakdown when parties have been living separately for a prolonged period and are engaged in acrimonious litigations, with no possibility of reconciliation, as held in Shilpa Sailesh vs Varun Sreenivasan; transfer of cases can be ordered to ensure convenience and justice
Judgment Excerpts: The argument raised by learned counsel for the petitioner was that the marriage between the parties had taken place on 28.01.2012 and the petitioner had left the matrimonial home after 65 days of the marriage on account of cruelty inflicted by the respondent and his family members. They have been living separately for the last more than a decade. Considering the fact that both the parties have been indulging in litigations one after the other, it is a case of irretrievable breakdown of marriage in which this Court can exercise its extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India and dissolve the marriage. He submitted that his entire life has been ruined because of false and frivolous cases filed by the petitioner. No doubt, they stayed together for few days but the reason for the petitioner for leaving the matrimonial home is not what she claims. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 28.01.2012. It is not in dispute that the parties are living separately since 02.04.2012. The reasons claimed by both the parties are different. Filing of the Transfer Petition before this Court is one part. Besides that, parties have filed number of cases against each other.
Procedural History: The petitioner filed Transfer Petition (Crl.) No.338 of 2025 seeking transfer of proceedings under Section 340 CrPC from Delhi to Lucknow; during proceedings, she filed I.A.No.200539 of 2025 under Article 142 seeking dissolution of marriage; the matter was referred to mediation on 22.07.2025 but did not proceed; hearings were held on 14.10.2025, 18.08.2025, and 28.10.2025; on 21.11.2025, parties were directed to furnish complete list of cases; the Court heard arguments and decided the matter
