IRRETRIEVABLE BREAKDOWN OF MARRIAGE, A NEW GROUND FOR DIVORCE ?

Do we have a A NEW GROUND FOR DIVORCE ?

The irretrievable breakdown of marriage isn’t a ground for divorce under any of the particular laws in India. still, the Supreme Court has held that it can be considered as a ground for divorce under Composition 142 of the Constitution, which gives the Supreme Court the power to do” complete justice” in any case.

In the case of Vijay Kumar v. Ritu, the Supreme Court held that the irretrievable breakdown of marriage can be inferred from the following factors The couple has been living independently for a long period of time. There’s no stopgap of conciliation between the couple. The couple has no children or their children have grown up and are independent. The couple has made a conscious decision to end the marriage.

The Supreme Court has also held that the irretrievable breakdown of marriage shouldn’t be confused with dereliction or atrocity. dereliction is the willful and unjustified absence of one partner from the other for a nonstop period of at least two times. Cruelty is the willful infliction of physical or internal suffering on the other partner.

In the case of K.S. Puttaswamyv. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that the right to sequestration is a abecedarian right under Composition 21 of the Constitution. This right includes the right to end a marriage that has irretrievably broken down

. The Supreme Court’s rulings on the irretrievable breakdown of marriage have been ate by numerous people, who argue that they give couples the freedom to end their marriages when there’s no stopgap of conciliation. still, others have argued that the rulings are too lenient and that they could lead to the breakdown of marriages that could be saved.

Eventually, the question of whether or not to grant a divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage is a complex bone
that must be decided on a case- by- case base. The Supreme Court’s rulings give guidance on the factors that should be considered, but they don’t give a definitive answer.

The rearmost case law of the Delhi High Court on irretrievable breakdown of marriage is the judgment in the case of Reenav. Rajesh, decided on September 6, 2023. In this case, the court held that the irretrievable breakdown of marriage can be inferred from the following factors:  The couple has been living independently for a period of at least 5 times.

There’s no stopgap of conciliation between the couple. The couple has no children or their children have grown up and are independent. The couple has made a conscious decision to end the marriage.

The court also held that the irretrievable breakdown of marriage shouldn’t be confused with dereliction or atrocity. dereliction is the willful and unjustified absence of one partner from the other for a nonstop period of at least 2 times. Cruelty is the willful infliction of physical or internal suffering on the other partner.

The court further held that the irretrievable breakdown of marriage can be a ground for divorce indeed if the marriage was praised under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which doesn’t explicitly fete this ground for divorce. The court held that the right to sequestration is a abecedarian right under Composition 21 of the Constitution, and this right includes the right to end a marriage that has irretrievably broken down. The Delhi High Court’s judgment in the case of Reenav.

Rajesh is a significant development in the law of divorce in India. It provides clarity on the factors that can be considered in determining whether or not a marriage has irretrievably broken down, and it opens the door for couples to seek divorce indeed if their marriage was praised under a law that doesn’t explicitly fete this ground for divorce.

The judgment is likely to be ate by numerous couples who are floundering to save their marriages. It gives them the option to end their marriages if there’s no stopgap of conciliation, and it does so without taking them to prove that the other partner has committed any fault. still, the judgment is also likely to be met with review from some diggings.

Some people may argue that it makes it too easy for couples to get disassociated, and that it could lead to the breakdown of marriages that could be saved. Eventually, the impact of the Delhi High Court’s judgment in the case of Reenav. Rajesh remains to be seen. still, it’s a significant development in the law of divorce in India, and it’s likely to have a major impact on the way that divorce cases are decided in the future.

Still others argue that the irretrievable breakdown of marriage is unfair to children. They argue that children are the ones who suffer the most when their parents’ marriage breaks down, and that the irretrievable breakdown of marriage makes it easier for parents to get divorced, even if it is not in the best interests of their children.

Ultimately, the question of whether or not the irretrievable breakdown of marriage is wrong is a complex one. There are valid arguments to be made on both sides of the issue. However, it is important to remember that divorce is a serious matter, and it should not be taken lightly. Couples should carefully consider all of their options before they decide to end their marriage.

Here are some of the specific arguments against the irretrievable breakdown of marriage:

• It is too subjective. What one person considers to be an irretrievable breakdown of marriage, another person may not.
• It can be used as a way to avoid responsibility. A spouse who wants a divorce may simply claim that the marriage has irretrievably broken down, even if this is not the case.
• It can be harmful to children. Children who are raised in broken homes are more likely to experience problems later in life, such as mental health problems and substance abuse.
• It can lead to a decline in the institution of marriage. If it becomes too easy to get a divorce, people may be less likely to take marriage seriously.

Despite these arguments, the irretrievable breakdown of marriage remains a valid ground for divorce in India. It is important to remember that every case is different, and the decision of whether or not to grant a divorce should be made on a case-by-case basis.