SUPREME COURT USES IT’S DISCRETIONARY POWER IN DISSOLVING MARRIAGE

INTRODUCTION

The case between Kiran Jyot Maini (the Appellant-wife) and Anish Pramod Patel (the Respondent-husband) before the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal Nos.2915-2918 Of 2024 (@ Special Leave to Petition (Crl.) Nos.672-675 Of 2024) revolves around a marital dispute that escalated into multiple legal proceedings.

FACTS

The couple got married on 30.04.2015. Within a year, on 13.04.2016, an FIR was registered based on the Appellant’s Complaint at Police Station Mahila Thana, Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) (Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty), Section 323 of IPC (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt), Section 504 of IPC (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace) and Sections 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (DPA) (Penalty for giving or taking dowry) and Section 4 of DPA (Penalty for demanding dowry).

The Respondent sought a stay on arrest and quashing of the FIR through a Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition in the Allahabad High Court, which referred the Parties to mediation and stayed the arrest. However, the mediation efforts and subsequent reconciliation attempts failed, leading to the continuation of their separation for nine years.

Legal Proceedings and Interim Maintenance

During this period, the Appellant filed several legal actions, including seeking protection under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence (PWDV) Act and applying for interim maintenance. On 10.05.2018, the Judicial Magistrate ordered the Respondent to pay interim maintenance of Rs. 35,000 to the Appellant. Both Parties Appealed the Order dated 10.05.2018 before the Additional Sessions Judge in Gautam Budh Nagar. On 01.02.2019, the Additional Sessions Judge modified the initial Order, directing the Respondent to pay Rs. 45,000 per month to the Appellant and Rs. 55,000 per month to her daughter, while dismissing the Respondent’s Appeal.

The Appellant filed a Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr. P.C.) (Saving of inherent power of High Court) seeking directions including attachment of the Respondent’s accounts, in the cases pending before the Mahila Court, Tis Hazari, Central, New Delhi which was registered as Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 406 of 2023. The Delhi High Court vide Order dated 08.05.2023 disposed off the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Appellant in the Petition and directed the Respondent to pay 10% of the total arrears of interim maintenance due till 31.12.2022, that is, 10% of Rs. 52,95,000/- as immediate interim relief to the Petitioner therein within a period of fifteen days from the date of the Order.

In the proceedings before the Mahila Court at Tis Hazari, Delhi, the Order dated 08.05.2023 of the High Court was modified and the Court directed the Respondent to pay Rs. 2 Lakhs to the Appellant within twenty-four hours and the remaining amount of Rs. 3,92,500/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Ninety-Two Thousand and Five Hundred Only) before 09.06.2023.

The High Court of Delhi while finally disposing of the Appellant’s Petition under Article 227 along with Criminal Revision and the Miscellaneous Application filed by the Respondent, directed the Respondent to pay a portion of the arrears of interim maintenance, eventually reaching 20% of the total arrears amounting to Rs. 65,00,000 (Rupees Sixty-Five Lakhs).

Supreme Court’s Analysis and Decision

The Supreme Court examined the facts and circumstances surrounding the prolonged and irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. The Court observed the grave allegations of cruelty and dowry demands made by the Appellant against the Respondent, the multiple failed mediation attempts, and the extended period of separation.

Dissolution of Marriage

The Court concluded that the marriage had irretrievably broken down, and all efforts for reconciliation had been unsuccessful. Citing its discretionary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, the Court decided to dissolve the marriage. This decision was made to prevent further emotional and practical suffering for both parties, as continuing the marital tie served no purpose.

Determination of Maintenance

Regarding the financial aspects, the Court discussed the law on one-time settlements in matrimonial disputes. It referred to several precedents, including the cases of Vinny Paramvir Parmar v. Paramvir Parmar 2011 (13) SCC 112 and Rajnesh v. Neha and Another (2021) 2 SCC 32, which outline broad factors for determining permanent alimony. These factors include the income and properties of both parties, their conduct, lifestyle, social status, and other relevant considerations.

The Court emphasized that there is no fixed formula for determining the amount of permanent alimony, as each case is subjective. The primary objective is to ensure that the dependent spouse does not suffer financially due to the marriage’s failure while avoiding the imposition of undue financial burden on the other spouse.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court dissolved the marriage under Article 142, recognizing the irretrievable breakdown and the need for financial protection for the Appellant-wife, and directed the Respondent to pay Rs. 2 Crore within four months from 15.07.2024 to the Appellant as permanent alimony. The Supreme Court’s decision in this case highlighted the complexities involved in matrimonial disputes, especially when the marriage has irretrievably broken down. The Court’s use of its discretionary powers under Article 142 to dissolve the marriage and its careful consideration of maintenance laws demonstrate a balanced approach to ensuring justice for both Parties.

 

Kartik Khandekar

Senior Associate

The Indian Lawyer & Allied Services

 

Editor’s Comments

In today’s day and age couples have lost their patience with each other very often bickering over small issues that escalate and eventually become insurmountable. In this matter also, the couple had a prolonged legal battle for more than 9 years which obviously takes its toll on both parties. Possibly, the most dangerous aspect of such prolonged legal battles is that very often the children in such marriages are scarred for life. The Apex Court understanding these aspects, may have decided to cut short the matter by dissolving the marriage and giving the alimony that was due to the wife, under its special powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India.

Sushila Ram Varma

Chief Consultant

The Indian Lawyer & Allied Services