Supreme CourtFamily LawConstitutional Law

Dissolution of Marriage Under Article 142 Granted Due to Irretrievable Breakdown despite Lack of Mutual Consent

Salil Dhawanv.Priyanshi Ghai

Dissolution of Marriage Under Article 142 Granted Due to Irretrievable Breakdown despite Lack of Mutual Consent. Salil Dhawan vs Priyanshi Ghai. Supreme Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

1. Whether the Supreme Court should exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution to dissolve the marriage on the ground of its irretrievable breakdown despite the lack of mutual consent at the second motion stage.

The court held

The Court set aside the High Court's order and dissolved the marriage under Article 142 of the Constitution.

It also directed

The husband was directed to pay a total of Rs. 50,00,000 as permanent alimony in two instalments: Rs. 25 Lakhs by June 15, 2026, and the remaining Rs. 25 Lakhs by September 15, 2026; consequently, all pending proceedings, including the DV Act complaint, maintenance petitions under CrPC, and contempt cases, were ordered closed and disposed of.

The Registry was directed to draw up the decree of divorce upon proof of the final payment.

01Facts

The parties married on April 19, 2017.

¶ 3.1

Following marital discord, the respondent-wife initiated multiple proceedings, including maintenance claims under Section 90(i) of the Army Act and Section 125 CrPC, as well as a complaint under the DV Act.

¶ 3.4–3.7

On February 21, 2019, the parties entered a settlement agreement to file for divorce by mutual consent for a sum of Rs. 31 Lakhs (revised to Rs. 32 Lakhs), of which Rs. 20 Lakhs was paid to the wife.

¶ 3.8–3.11

The wife subsequently refused to sign the second motion, leading the Family Court to dismiss the divorce petition.

¶ 3.12–3.13

The High Court of Allahabad upheld this dismissal on October 3, 2024, directing that the Rs. 20 Lakhs already paid be adjusted against maintenance arrears.

¶ 3.15

During the Supreme Court proceedings, the wife returned the Rs. 20 Lakhs to the husband and expressed a desire to contest the divorce on grounds of adultery.

¶ 6, 10

02Issues

i.1. Whether the Supreme Court should exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution to dissolve the marriage on the ground of its irretrievable breakdown despite the lack of mutual consent at the second motion stage.

¶ 7

ii.2. Whether the Court can fix a final comprehensive permanent alimony to settle all pending and future claims between the parties.

¶ 8

03Law Applied

The Court exercised its plenary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, which allows the Supreme Court to pass such decrees or orders as are necessary for doing "complete justice" in any cause or matter.

¶ 5, 7

Where a marriage has irretrievably broken down with no possibility of reconciliation, and parties have lived separately for a significant duration (over eight years in this instance), the Court may dissolve the union to prevent the prolongation of a "marriage that exists only on paper".

¶ 7

Provisions in the judgment · 3 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Army Act, 1950 Section 90

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 12

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section 13

04Reasoning

The Court observed that despite the respondent-wife’s opposition to a mutual decree and her intent to pursue a contested divorce for adultery, the marriage was functionally dead.

¶ 6–7

The Bench noted eight years of separation, deep-seated acrimony, and a multiplicity of civil and criminal litigations as evidence of irretrievable breakdown.

¶ 7

The Court determined that compelling the parties to remain legally wedded served no legitimate purpose.

¶ 7

To ensure "complete justice," the Court evaluated the parties' earning capacities, standards of living, and the wife's future financial security, deciding to enhance the previously agreed-upon alimony of Rs. 32 Lakhs to Rs. 50 Lakhs to serve as a final settlement of all past and future claims under Section 125 CrPC and the Army Act.

¶ 9, 11

05Holding

The Court set aside the High Court's order and dissolved the marriage under Article 142 of the Constitution.

¶ 12

The husband was directed to pay a total of Rs. 50,00,000 as permanent alimony in two instalments: Rs. 25 Lakhs by June 15, 2026, and the remaining Rs. 25 Lakhs by September 15, 2026; consequently, all pending proceedings, including the DV Act complaint, maintenance petitions under CrPC, and contempt cases, were ordered closed and disposed of.

¶ 12, 13

The Registry was directed to draw up the decree of divorce upon proof of the final payment.

¶ 14
Supreme Court

Original Court PDF

Salil DhawanvsPriyanshi Ghai

Supreme Court · May 27, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment