CUTTACK: Marriage carries sanctity, but courts cannot preserve its legal form when mutual respect, trust and companionship have substantially eroded, the Orissa High Court has observed while upholding a Family Court’s decree dissolving a marriage on grounds of cruelty.
A division bench of Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Chittaranjan Dash made the observation while dismissing an appeal filed by a husband against the January 27, 2024 judgment of the Family Court, Rayagada.
The bench said, “The sanctity of marriage is not served by preserving only the legal form of the relationship when the substantive foundation of that relationship has been substantially eroded.”
It added that mutual respect, trust, companionship and willingness to make reasonable adjustments were not peripheral attributes but constituted the very foundation of matrimonial life.
The couple, both BTech graduates working in the IT sector, had married according to Hindu rites on October 20, 2021. They initially lived together in Visakhapatnam and later in Hyderabad. However, within a relatively short period, their relationship was marked by allegations of physical and mental ill-treatment, serious confrontations between the parties and their families, loss of mutual confidence and eventual separation.
The husband challenged the Family Court’s decision to dissolve the marriage under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, contending, among other things, that his subsequent filing of a petition under Section 9 of the Act showed his willingness to continue the marriage.
The HC said this circumstance could not by itself wipe out the conduct preceding the separation or its impact on the wife. The bench also took note of an unsuccessful attempt to reconcile the couple before the HC on March 20, 2026. When brought face to face, both expressed their desire to end the marital relationship.
The court clarified that irretrievable breakdown of marriage, by itself, was not a statutory ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act. However, the subsequent course of the relationship could be considered in assessing whether the proved conduct amounted to mental cruelty.
“The foundation of the decree remains the cruelty established from the evidence,” the bench said, holding that compelling the wife to resume the relationship would be unrealistic.
