JUDGMENT 3rd April, 2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the Parties.

2. Present Appeal is directed against the impugned judgment dated 26th September, 2023 of learned Judge, Family Court, Bhadrak, wherein the prayer of the husband to grant decree of divorce has been rejected on the ground of non-fulfillment of statutory period prescribed under Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as “HMA”).

3. The background facts of the case are that the marriage between the Appellant-husband and the Respondent-wife was solemnised on May 13, 2020, following Hindu rites and customs.

The marriage was arranged by their families, and after the solemnisation, the couple began their matrimonial life at the husband’s residence. However, within a short span of time, marital discord arose between the parties, leading to serious disputes and allegations from both sides. The situation allegedly deteriorated further when, on June 24, 2020, just over a month after the marriage, the Respondent-wife left the matrimonial home and did not return despite repeated requests by the Appellant and his family. The Appellant claims that all efforts for reconciliation, including interventions by family elders and mediators, failed as the Respondent remained adamant about not resuming cohabitation. Subsequently, on July 7, 2020, the Appellant filed a petition for divorce before the Family Court, Bhadrak, invoking grounds under the HMA. However, this petition was filed within two months of the marriage, raising concerns under Section 14 of the HMA, which mandates that no petition for divorce can be entertained within one year of marriage unless exceptional hardship or depravity is established. Despite this statutory bar, the Family Court proceeded with the matter, and both parties adduced evidence and contested the case on its merits without raising the issue of maintainability.

4. The learned Judge, Family Court, Bhadrak, after examining the pleadings, evidence, and arguments presented by both parties, dismissed the Appellant-husband’s petition for divorce. The Family Court found that the Appellant failed to establish sufficient grounds for cruelty or desertion under the HMA. The Court also found that the Appellant failed to make sincere efforts for reconciliation before seeking divorce, and instead, hastily approached the Court within two months of marriage, which was in clear contravention of Section 14 of the HMA, barring divorce petitions within the first year of marriage unless exceptional hardship is demonstrated. Despite this statutory bar, the Family Court proceeded with the case on merits but ultimately concluded that the Appellant did not establish a valid ground for divorce, leading to the dismissal of the petition.

5. The limited issue before this Court pertains to the procedural lapse under Section 14 of the HMA. Mr. S.K. Mishra, learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant, has submitted that the matter should be remanded to the Family Court for fresh adjudication, considering the procedural defect and the lapse of substantial time.

6. Section 14 of HMA creates a statutory bar on the presentation of a divorce petition within one year of marriage. This provision ensures that matrimonial disputes are not brought prematurely before Courts, allowing spouses a reasonable opportunity to reconcile and prevent hasty dissolutions of marriage. The section reads as –

14. No petition for divorce to be presented within one year of marriage.—

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, it shall not be competent for any Court to entertain any petition for dissolution of a marriage by a decree of divorce, [unless at the date of the presentation of the petition one year has elapsed] since the date of the marriage:

Provided that the Court may, upon application made to it in accordance with such rules as may be made by the High Court in that behalf, allow a petition to be presented [before one year has elapsed] since the date of the marriage on the gr