The Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan 2023 is a landmark judgment that marks a significant milestone in matrimonial law. In this the Supreme Court of India examined the scope of its discretionary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, specifically in the context of granting divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage—a ground not codified under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Learn about other important Landmark Judgements.

Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan Introduction

Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan 2023 is a landmark judgement by the Supreme Court of India that addressed the power of the Court under Article 142 of the Constitution to grant divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage. This ground is not yet codified under statutory law. The case emerged from a prolonged marital dispute, highlighting important questions about justice, statutory limitations and the practical realities of failed marriages.

Download Free Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan PDF

The case of Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan centres around a long-standing marital conflict between Shilpa Sailesh and Varun Sreenivasan, marked by over six years of separation and multiple failed attempts at reconciliation. With both parties initiating several legal proceedings including domestic violence complaints to criminal charges under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code. The dispute escalated through the judicial system. Due to the complexity and irretrievable breakdown of the marriage, the matter was brought before the Supreme Court of India for a final resolution. The following are the brief facts of Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan -

Marital Discord and Separation

The Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan case involved a matrimonial conflict between the parties Shilpa Sailesh and Varun Sreenivasan, a couple entangled in prolonged litigation regarding the dissolution of their marriage. The couple had been living separately for over 6 years. Several attempts at reconciliation were undertaken during this time but none succeeded in resolving their differences. The prolonged separation highlighted a breakdown in marital conflicts.

Legal Proceedings Initiated

Both parties resorted to various legal remedies in their attempt to resolve disputes including

• Proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act
• Applications under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.)
• Criminal complaints under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)

These proceedings were initiated independently by both parties.

Trial Court Intervention

At the Trial Court level, limited efforts were made to facilitate reconciliation. However, these attempts failed to address fundamental marital issues such as:

• Communication breakdown
• Allegations of cruelty and misconduct
• Financial disputes
• Deep-rooted incompatibility

Due to the complex nature of the allegations and absence of mutual understanding, the lower courts were unable to provide a conclusive resolution.

Escalation to the Supreme Court

Given the conflicting versions of events and the failure of lower courts to reach a definitive conclusion, the matter was then brought before the Supreme Court of India. The intervention of the Supreme Court was sought to provide a final determination and put an end to the prolonged legal tussle.

Core Allegations

The Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan case was mainly based on mutual allegations which included:

• Cruelty by both parties
• Incidents of domestic violence
• Claims of irretrievable breakdown of the marriage

Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan Issue addressed

The following issues were addressed in the case of Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan 2023 -

• Whether the Supreme Court can dissolve a marriage solely on the ground of irretrievable breakdown under Article 142 of Indian Constitution?
  The central issue in Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan was whether the Supreme Court, in the exercise of its plenary powers under Article 142 (1) could grant divorce even if irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not a statutorily recognized ground under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
• Whether exercising such power under Article 142 of Constitution violates the public policy or statutory scheme of matrimonial laws?
  The Supreme Court in Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan examined if granting divorce under Article 142 would contravene the principles of public policy especially since Parliament has not yet codified irretrievable breakdown as a ground for divorce.
• Whether the mandatory six-month cooling-off period under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act for divorce by mutual consent can be waived?
  The Court in Shilpa Sailesh vs. Varun Sreenivasan revisited whether the statutory waiting period for mutual consent divorce can be dispensed with, especially in cases where waiting would only prolong the agony and serve no practical purpose.

Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan Legal Provisions

Article 142 of Indian Constitution and Section 13B (2) of Hindu Marriage Act played a significant role in Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan 2023. The following are the legal analysis of these provisions -

Article 142 of the Constitution of India

Article 142 of Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to pass any decree or make any order necessary for “complete justice” in any cause or matter pending before it. The primary issue in Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan revolved around whether the Supreme Court can invoke this Article to grant divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, even if such a ground is not provided under statutory law.

Section 13B (2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Section 13B Clause (2) provides for a six-month mandatory cooling-off period between the filing of the first and second motion for divorce by mutual consent. The Court in Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan considered whether this period can be waived by the Supreme Court in cases where the waiting period serves no meaningful purpose.

On 1st May, 2023, the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul Justice Sanjiv Khanna Justice Abhay S. Oka Justice Vikram Nath and Justice J.K. Maheshwari in Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan held that it possesses the authority under Article 142 (1) of the Constitution of India to grant divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage, even though this is not yet a formally recognised statutory ground under the Hindu Marriage Act.

Justice Sanjiv Khanna, delivering the operative part of the Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan judgment highlighted that such an extraordinary power is exercised to do ‘complete justice’ between the parties. The Court explained that when it is fully convinced that the marriage has collapsed beyond repair and that continued ties would only prolong emotional trauma, it can exercise its equitable jurisdiction under Article 142 to dissolve such a marriage.

The Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan judgment laid down the guidelines and factors that should be considered in such cases, including:

• Duration of separation (a period of six years or more being significant)
• The extent and nature of allegations made by both parties
• Previous legal proceedings and attempts at mediation or reconciliation
• The personal, social and economic status of the spouses,
• Arrangements for maintenance, alimony and custody and welfare of children, if any.

Importantly, the Court in Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan explained that these factors are illustrative, not exhaustive and each case must be evaluated on its own facts.

The 5-Judge Bench in Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan also reaffirmed that the six-month waiting period under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act for divorce by mutual consent can be waived in appropriate cases, as previously held by the Court.

The judgment noted that when a marriage is emotionally and practically dead, it is better to legally recognise the dissolution than to force parties to remain in a burdensome and unworkable relationship. The fault-based approach to matrimonial disputes, such as apportioning blame, should not override the broader goal of delivering justice in such sensitive matters.

Thus, the Supreme Court in Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan concluded that its discretionary power to dissolve a marriage under Article 142 must be used with great care and caution, ensuring a balance of equities and safeguarding the rights of both spouses and their children.

Conclusion

Shilpa Sailesh v Varun Sreenivasan 2023 the Supreme Court concluded that it holds the authority to waive statutory requirements in order to deliver complete justice, provided such power is exercised with caution and responsibility. It also held that mutual divorce may be granted when both parties reach a settlement and there is no possibility of restoring the marital relationship.