NEW DELHI: After exercising its omnibus powers beneath Article 142 of the Structure for the previous 26 years to annul irretrievably damaged marriages, the Supreme Court docket on Tuesday agreed to look at whether or not it may grant divorce to estranged {couples} with out each companions consenting to annulment of marriage.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, A S Oka, Vikram Nath and J Okay Maheshwari stated although the omnibus powers beneath Article 142 has been conferred solely on the SC to do full justice in a case that required train of such powers, it’s value analyzing whether or not there needs to be some tips, process or inhibition on this regard.
Amicus curiae V Giri knowledgeable the court docket that the SC in its June 29, 2016, order had referred the difficulty to a five-judge bench and framed two questions — what may very well be the broad parameters for train of powers beneath Article 142 to dissolve a wedding between consenting events with out referring the events to a Household Court docket to attend for the necessary interval prescribed beneath Part 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act; and whether or not the train of such jurisdiction shouldn’t be made in any respect or whether or not such train needs to be left to be decided within the information of each case.
Giri stated the then lawyer normal Mukul Rohatgi had on April 22, 2015, added two extra questions in his written submissions, which included whether or not the train of powers beneath Article 142 can be unique of the process offered for divorce beneath provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Justice Kaul-led bench stated, “We do imagine that one other query which might require consideration can be whether or not the ability beneath Article 142 of the Structure of India is inhibited in any method in a state of affairs the place there may be an irretrievable breakdown of marriage within the opinion of the court docket however one of many events shouldn’t be consenting to the phrases.”
Within the 2016 order, the SC had appointed senior advocate Giri, Indira Jaising, Dushyant Dave and Meenakshi Arora as amici curiae. The SC posted the matter for additional listening to on September 28.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, A S Oka, Vikram Nath and J Okay Maheshwari stated although the omnibus powers beneath Article 142 has been conferred solely on the SC to do full justice in a case that required train of such powers, it’s value analyzing whether or not there needs to be some tips, process or inhibition on this regard.
Amicus curiae V Giri knowledgeable the court docket that the SC in its June 29, 2016, order had referred the difficulty to a five-judge bench and framed two questions — what may very well be the broad parameters for train of powers beneath Article 142 to dissolve a wedding between consenting events with out referring the events to a Household Court docket to attend for the necessary interval prescribed beneath Part 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act; and whether or not the train of such jurisdiction shouldn’t be made in any respect or whether or not such train needs to be left to be decided within the information of each case.
Giri stated the then lawyer normal Mukul Rohatgi had on April 22, 2015, added two extra questions in his written submissions, which included whether or not the train of powers beneath Article 142 can be unique of the process offered for divorce beneath provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Justice Kaul-led bench stated, “We do imagine that one other query which might require consideration can be whether or not the ability beneath Article 142 of the Structure of India is inhibited in any method in a state of affairs the place there may be an irretrievable breakdown of marriage within the opinion of the court docket however one of many events shouldn’t be consenting to the phrases.”
Within the 2016 order, the SC had appointed senior advocate Giri, Indira Jaising, Dushyant Dave and Meenakshi Arora as amici curiae. The SC posted the matter for additional listening to on September 28.
