Living Separately Does Not Mean a Marriage Has Ended, Rules Supreme Court

---

New Delhi: In a significant ruling on marital relationships, the Supreme Court has clarified that a husband and wife living separately does not automatically mean their marriage has broken down. The court emphasised that before drawing such a conclusion, all evidence must be thoroughly examined.

A bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that courts today often assume marital breakdown solely based on prolonged separation. However, the judges said that Family Courts and High Courts must first determine who is responsible for the separation and whether one spouse intentionally forced the other to leave.

The bench noted that unless there is strong evidence of desertion or refusal to cohabit, courts should avoid concluding that the marriage has collapsed—especially because such findings can have a devastating impact on children.

What the Supreme Court Said

The court stressed that before dissolving a marriage on the grounds of separation, judges must:

• Examine all evidence presented on record in detail.
• Consider the social background, circumstances, and overall conduct of both parties.

The ruling came during the hearing of an appeal filed by a woman challenging a High Court order that granted her husband a divorce on the grounds of cruelty. The Supreme Court partly overturned that decision.

Case Background

The couple married in 2009 and had a son in 2010. Soon after, disputes began, leading to multiple legal battles.

• The husband first filed for divorce on grounds of cruelty but later withdrew the petition.
• In 2013, he filed another divorce petition—this time alleging desertion.
• The wife opposed the claim.
• In 2018, the trial court dismissed the husband’s petition.
• The High Court later reversed the decision and granted him divorce.

During the review, the Supreme Court found that the High Court had accepted the husband’s claims but ignored the wife’s allegation that she was forced out of her matrimonial home and had no choice but to live separately.

The Supreme Court also noted that the child has been in the mother’s custody from the beginning, which supports her version.

Key Questions the High Court Must Re-examine

The Supreme Court sent the case back to the High Court, directing it to reconsider the matter by addressing these crucial questions:

1. Was the wife forced out of her matrimonial home, or did she leave voluntarily?
2. Does the husband’s withdrawal of his first divorce petition prevent him from filing another petition on similar grounds?
3. Did the husband act with cruelty by refusing to let the wife stay in the marital home or by failing to provide care, affection, and financial support for the child?

The Supreme Court found no detailed analysis of these issues in the earlier High Court judgment.