Premature Divorce Plea Lacks Legal Ground
The Orissa High Court has ruled that any divorce petition under the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA), 1955, filed within one year of marriage, must be backed by a separate application. This application must clearly show exceptional hardship or exceptional depravity to justify waiving the one-year waiting period as stated in Section 14(1) proviso.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Bibhu Prasad Routray and Justice Chittaranjan Dash clarified that courts retain discretion, but only after a proper application is filed and allowed.
Case Background: Marriage Broke Within Weeks
The appellant-husband and respondent-wife married on May 13, 2020, under Hindu customs. However, within a month, serious conflicts emerged. The wife left the matrimonial home on June 24, 2020, and never returned.
The husband filed for divorce on July 7, 2020, before the Family Court, Bhadrak, despite the one-year statutory bar under Section 14 of HMA. The Family Court allowed evidence and full trial without addressing the maintainability of the case.
Eventually, the court dismissed the divorce plea, stating the husband failed to prove cruelty or desertion. The husband challenged this dismissal in appeal.
Petitioner’s Stance: Ignored Legal Precondition
The High Court found that the husband neither filed a separate application nor made any specific prayer to waive the one-year limit. This made the original divorce petition procedurally defective.
Court’s Ruling: Legal Bar Absolute Without Leave
The Court held that Section 14(1) aims to protect the sanctity of marriage and prevent premature or impulsive divorces. It reiterated that exceptions apply only if a separate application proves exceptional hardship or depravity.
Citing Smt. Alka Saxena v. Sri Pankaj Saxena (2024), the Court emphasized that no divorce petition is maintainable before one year unless such leave is formally granted.
Final Verdict: Remanded for Fresh Trial
Despite procedural lapses, the Court chose to remand the case back to the Family Court. It reasoned that both parties had contested the case fully and were living apart for nearly five years.
The Court condoned the delay and granted leave in this specific case, allowing the Family Court to re-evaluate the matter. However, it stressed this should not be taken as a general precedent or a dilution of the law’s intent.
Key Takeaway
Parties seeking early divorce under the HMA must file a separate application proving exceptional grounds. Without it, courts cannot entertain such petitions.
