Supreme Court Invokes Article 142 to Dissolve Marriage Marred by Decades of Litigation Despite Spousal Opposition
The landscape of matrimonial jurisprudence in India has witnessed a significant evolution, particularly concerning the dissolution of marriages that have functionally ceased to exist. In the landmark judgment of Neha Lal Vs Abhishek Kumar, the Supreme Court of India exercised its extraordinary constitutional powers to formally end a marriage that had been consumed by an avalanche of retaliatory litigations. This case serves as a pivotal reference point for legal practitioners and disputing parties, illustrating that the apex court will not hesitate to bypass statutory limitations to deliver complete justice when a marital bond is irreparably shattered.
The Genesis of the Matrimonial Dispute
The factual matrix of the dispute traces back to a marriage solemnized on January 28, 2012. What was intended to be a lifelong companionship devolved into immediate discord, resulting in the couple cohabiting for a mere 65 days. Following their separation on April 2, 2012, the relationship transformed into a relentless legal battlefield.
The matter reached the Supreme Court initially in the form of a transfer petition. The wife sought to relocate a pending perjury application—initiated by the husband under Section 340 CrPC—from the Family Court in Delhi to a competent court in Lucknow. During the pendency of this transfer plea, the wife filed an application urging the apex court to invoke Article 142 of the Constitution of India to grant a decree of divorce, citing the irretrievable breakdown of their marriage.
The Husband's Vehement Opposition
The husband, appearing in person, strongly resisted the plea for dissolution. He argued that his life had been systematically dismantled by a barrage of frivolous lawsuits filed by his estranged wife. His core contentions included:
- A complete denial of any mutual settlement or agreement to part ways amicably.
- An assertion that the wife was financially independent, allegedly earning a substantial income, while he had been forced to abandon his career to defend himself in court.
- A firm demand that the perjury applications filed against the wife for allegedly making false statements on oath must reach their logical, punitive conclusion.
The Web of Endless Litigation
One of the most striking aspects of Neha Lal Vs Abhishek Kumar was the sheer volume of legal proceedings the couple had initiated against each other. The Supreme Court noted that the parties had weaponized the judicial system, filing over 40 distinct cases across various jurisdictions, including Delhi, Ghaziabad, and Lucknow.