' A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta exercised extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution to dissolve the marriage, stating that the union had 'dead broken down' beyond any scope of reconciliation. The court emphasized that continuing such a relationship would only lead to further mental agony for both parties.
Exercise of Article 142 for Irretrievable Breakdown
In a significant judicial intervention, the apex court utilized its special powers to grant a divorce, bypassing standard procedural delays. The bench observed that the marriage was practically dead and that the case was fit for the exercise of powers under Article 142. This constitutional provision allows the Supreme Court to pass any decree or order necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it, which in this case meant ending a toxic legal cycle.
Judicial Rebuke for 'Vindictive' Legal Tactics
The court directed sharp criticism toward the husband, a legal professional, for misusing his expertise to harass his estranged wife. According to the bench, the husband had launched a 'vindictive and harassing' campaign not only against the petitioner wife and her relatives but also against her legal counsel. The judges noted that the husband filed numerous applications at every level to complicate and prolong the proceedings, reflecting a hostile and litigious attitude aimed at retribution.
Comprehensive Quashing of 80 Legal Proceedings
The scale of the legal battle was unprecedented, with over 80 cases, including civil suits, criminal complaints, and FIRs, filed by the husband across various courts. Recognizing these as tools of harassment, the Supreme Court ordered the immediate quashing of all 80 pending matters. By doing so, the court aimed to provide a 'full stop' to the litigation that had crossed all boundaries of reasonable legal recourse and had transformed into a decade-long war of attrition.
Financial Settlement and Child Custody Directives
To ensure the financial security of the wife and the couple's two children, the Supreme Court directed the husband to pay a total sum of ₹5 crore. This amount is to be paid within one year, either as a lump sum or in four installments. Also, the court granted full custody of the two sons to the mother. While the wife retains primary custody, the court has allowed the husband visitation rights, ensuring that the paternal bond is maintained despite the dissolution of the marriage.