Long period of separation between husband, wife amounts to cruelty to both: SC

NEw new delhi, dissolution the wedlock betwixt an estranged couple up, the Supreme Court on Monday said that a long period of separation between a husband and wife without any hope for reconciliation amounts to cruelty to both parties.A bench of Justices Manmohan and Joymalya Bagchi noted that the estranged couple, who got married on August 4, 2000, entered into matrimonial litigation in 2003, just two years of marriage, and have been living separately for 24 years owing to their differences in views.It said despite repeated efforts by courts, there has been no reconciliation between the parties.The bench said in a multitude of cases, this court has had the opportunity to deal with situations where parties have been living separately for a considerable time and it has been consistently held that a long period of separation without any hope for reconciliation amounts to cruelty to both parties.The top court said, "This court is also of the view that pendency of matrimonial litigation for a long duration only leads to perpetuity of marriage on paper. It is in the best interest of the parties and the society if ties are severed between parties in cases where litigation has been pending for a considerable period."Consequently, this court is of the opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by keeping the matrimonial litigation pending in court without granting relief to the parties," the bench said.Exercising its plenary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the bench ordered the dissolution of the marriage between the estranged couple hailing from Shillong on the ground that it has irretrievably broken down.The top court upheld the order of the additional deputy commissioner , Shillong, and set aside the order of the high court, which restored the marriage on the plea of the wife, observing that there was no intent to permanently forsake and abandon the husband.The bench said in the case at hand, spouses have strongly held views with regard to the approach towards matrimonial life and they have refused to accommodate each other for a long period of time."Consequently, their conduct amounts to cruelty to each other. This court is of the view that in matrimonial matters involving two individuals, it is not for the society or the court to sit in judgment over which spouse's approach is correct or not. It is their strongly held views and their refusal to accommodate each other that amounts to cruelty to one another," it said.Referring to a 2007 verdict on a matrimonial dispute, the bench said marriage becomes a legal fiction supported by a legal tie and refusal to sever such a tie does not serve the sanctity of marriage, but may lead to mental cruelty.The bench said in any event, the Supreme Court, in exercise of power to do "complete justice" under Article 142 of the Constitution, has the discretion to dissolve the marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown.Justice Manmohan, who penned the verdict on behalf of the bench, said this court is conscious of the view that the approach of the courts should be to preserve the sanctity of marriage and the court should be reluctant to dissolve the marriage at the mere asking of one of the parties."But, in the present case, the parties have lived separately for far too long a period of time and there is no sanctity left in the marriage. Also, rapprochement is not in the realm of possibility. Grant of divorce in the present proceedings would not have a devastating effect on any third party, as there are no children from the wedlock," the top court said.It said there was cogent evidence that the parties have refused to cohabit with each other due to a fundamental difference in their approach towards matrimonial life.This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.