The Court also observed that marriages are not merely a social contract but a spiritual union that binds two souls together.
The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court recently raised concerns over the increasing misuse of matrimonial laws and underscored the judiciary’s role in encouraging peaceful and respectful resolution of such disputes [ARP v State of Maharashtra].
Justices Nitin Sambre and MM Nerlikar noted that laws such as the Domestic Violence Act, the Hindu Marriage Act, and the Special Marriage Act were intended to uphold and protect marital relationships. However, these provisions are now frequently being misused, leading to a rise in litigation and further straining the judicial system.
“We are experiencing that, Legislation intended to improve marital relationships, such as the Domestic Violence Act, the Hindu Marriage Act and the Special Marriage Act etc., are frequently misused by parties, resulting in multiplicity of litigation, that not only burdens the Court, but, also cause mental as well as physical harassment, endless conflict, financial loss and irreversible harm to children and other family members. In such cases, the Court should support a respectful settlement to terminate all litigation between the parties while protecting their life and liberty, which is a fundamental right guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” the Court said.
The Court also voiced concern about the increasing instability of modern marriages, emphasizing the wider social consequences of such conflicts.
“Marital discord has now a days become menace in the society due to various factors. The parties who are fighting due to these marital discord are having several remedies in law. The small issue between the two are spoiling the entire life and the marriages which are sacrosanct in Hindus are at stake. Marriages are not merely a social contract, but, a spiritual union that binds two souls together. However, now a days these scared marriages receive set back in the above circumstances. The distress, disharmony and lack of adjustment amongst the persons lead to conflict.”
The Court made these observations while setting aside criminal proceedings against four individuals named in a matrimonial dispute. The case stemmed from petitions filed by a man, his two sisters, and his maternal aunt, who were accused in an FIR lodged by his wife in December 2023 at Beltarodi Police Station in Nagpur.
The FIR included charges under Sections 498A (cruelty by husband or his relatives) and 377 (unnatural offences) of the Indian Penal Code, as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
The wife had accused her husband and his family of subjecting her to physical and mental cruelty, sexual assault, dowry harassment, and digital privacy violations. A charge sheet was filed, and trial proceedings had commenced before the Magistrate’s court.
However, after reaching a settlement, the parties were granted a mutual consent divorce by the family court on July 1, 2025. The complainant subsequently filed an affidavit before the High Court, stating her intention to withdraw the criminal case. She also appeared personally and confirmed her consent to have the proceedings quashed.
Taking note of the settlement and the divorce decree, the High Court concluded that continuing the case would serve no useful purpose.
“We are of the opinion that matrimonial disputes, if re-union is not possible, shall be put to an end as early as possible otherwise the life of persons will be ruined, if it is permitted to go on and would be violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” the Court said.
The Court also observed the rising trend of criminal cases stemming from matrimonial disputes and emphasized the crucial role of the judiciary in guiding couples toward peaceful resolution of such issues.
“Needless to mention that considering the recent trend of filing first information reports against as many as persons from husband side, has become imperative to look the matters of matrimonial disputes from a different angle, and therefore, if the parties settle their disputes amicably in order to live peacefully, it is the duty of the Court to encourage such action by entertaining the prayer for quashing of the first information report, charge sheet or criminal proceedings,” the Bench said while quashing the case.
