Article 142: Supreme Court’s Brahmastra in Divorce & Matrimonial Cases

Introduction
The Indian Constitution endows the Supreme Court with extraordinary powers under Article 142(1), which authorizes it to “pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it.” This provision is unique and exceptional in nature, designed as a constitutional safeguard against injustice arising from the rigidity of statutory law or procedural constraints. In the context of matrimonial disputes, Article 142 has assumed special significance. Matrimonial litigation in India is often multifaceted, involving divorce petitions, claims of maintenance and alimony, custody battles, and even criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The statutory framework, particularly under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, does not recognize irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a ground for divorce. Consequently, the Supreme Court, invoking its plenary powers under Article 142, has intervened in appropriate cases to dissolve dead marriages, quash collateral proceedings, and provide a holistic resolution to litigating spouses.

Judicial Interpretation of Article 142
The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that Article 142 is a plenary and curative power, exercisable to prevent injustice when existing laws fall short. However, this power must be:

• exercised sparingly,

• in exceptional circumstances, and

• in conformity with constitutional principles, without disregarding substantive statutory provisions.
  
  

Application of Article 142 in Matrimonial Cases

1. Dissolution of Marriage on Irretrievable Breakdown
The Hindu Marriage Act does not explicitly provide for dissolution of marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown. Recognizing this legislative vacuum, the Supreme Court has invoked Article 142 to grant divorce in cases where the marital relationship is completely dead.

• Rakesh Raman v. Smt. Kavita (2023) 3 S.C.R. 552 – The Court held that though irretrievable breakdown is not an explicit ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, cruelty is. A marriage irretrievably broken amounts to cruelty, thereby justifying dissolution under Section 13(1)(ia).

• Naveen Kohli v. Neelu Kohli (2006) 4 SCC 558 – The Court recommended that Parliament consider adding irretrievable breakdown as a statutory ground for divorce.

• K. Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa (2013) 5 SCC 226 – The marriage was dissolved under Article 142 as there was no possibility of reconciliation.

• Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan (2023) 4 SCC 581 (Constitution Bench) – The Court held that marriages may be dissolved on the ground of irretrievable breakdown even without mutual consent under Section 13B HMA.

2. Quashing of Criminal Cases under Article 142
In matrimonial disputes, parties often initiate criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC or the Dowry Prohibition Act. Where the spouses have amicably settled their disputes or agreed to separate, continuing with such criminal trials serves no purpose. In such situations, the Supreme Court has exercised Article 142 to quash proceedings to secure complete justice.

• B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (2003) 4 SCC 675 – Criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC quashed after settlement between the parties.

• Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 – Recognized that criminal proceedings arising out of matrimonial disputes can be quashed to promote peace and harmony.

• V. Bhagat v. D. Bhagat (1994) 1 SCC 337 – Marriage dissolved while simultaneously settling ancillary issues.

• Anil Kumar Jain v. Maya Jain (2009) 10 SCC 415 – Marriage dissolved under Article 142 along with grant of permanent alimony to balance equities.

• Criminal Appeal No. 3602 of 2025 (decided on 19.08.2025) – The Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC and simultaneously decreed divorce, once again highlighting the breadth of its extraordinary powers.
  
  

Guiding Principles from Jurisprudence
From the above authorities, the following guiding principles emerge:

1. Article 142 may be invoked to shorten litigation and prevent hardship caused by statutory or procedural limitations.

2. The power is exercised when the marriage is found to be irretrievably broken, with no chance of revival.

3. It is applied particularly in cases involving comprehensive settlements so that all pending disputes between the parties stand resolved.

4. The jurisdiction is equitable in nature and is exercised to secure justice, not to contravene substantive law.
   
   

Conclusion
Article 142 of the Constitution represents the Supreme Court’s commitment to substantive justice over procedural technicalities. In matrimonial cases, where human emotions, dignity, and personal liberty are at stake, this constitutional provision enables the Court to bring closure to long-standing disputes and allow parties to move forward with their lives. By dissolving dead marriages, quashing redundant criminal proceedings, and settling ancillary issues in one stroke, the Court has ensured that litigants are not trapped in endless cycles of litigation. Thus, Article 142 stands as a beacon of complete justice, ensuring that matrimonial disputes are resolved holistically, equitably, and conclusively.

By Mahesh Tiwari, Advocate, Supreme Court of India