Mutual Incompatibility Alone Insufficient to Annul Hindu Marriage Within One Year

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that a Hindu marriage cannot be dissolved within one year based solely on mutual incompatibility, unless exceptional hardship or extreme depravity is demonstrated, as per Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

The parties had applied for a mutual divorce under Section 13-B of the Act, but their request was denied by the Principal Judge of the Family Court in Saharanpur, who pointed out that the mandatory one-year waiting period under Section 14 had not yet elapsed.

The division bench, consisting of Justice Ashwini Kumar Mishra and Justice Donadi Ramesh, clarified that Section 14 requires a one-year waiting period from the date of marriage before a divorce petition can be filed, except in cases where exceptional hardship or extreme depravity is proven.

In this case, it was observed that, aside from the common ground of mutual incompatibility, no exceptional circumstances were provided to justify allowing the parties to seek a divorce within one year of marriage.

The Court remarked that the application showed “no exceptional hardship or extreme depravity” to warrant invoking the jurisdiction under the proviso to Section 14 of the Act.

It concluded that a divorce petition could be rejected if no exceptional circumstances or extreme depravity are demonstrated to invoke the proviso to Section 14 of the Act.

The Court remarked:

The provision contained under Section 14 of the Act has a laudable object to subserve, inasmuch as the legislature has put an embargo in entertaining an application for dissolution of marriage, within one year for specific performance. Marriage between two Hindus is sacrosanct and its dissolution would be permissible only for the reasons permissible in law. On routine grounds of mutual incompatibility between the parties, it would not be open for the parties to seek exemption from one year limitation in filing such petition.”

Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal against the Family Court’s order, allowing the parties to file a new application once the one-year period has expired.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *