Marriage Never Consummated, Wife Left in 2008: SC Upholds Divorce But Orders Rs. 50 Lakh Alimony

In a marital dispute spanning over 17 years, the Supreme Court on November 13, 2025, upheld the divorce decree granted to a husband by the Family Court and later affirmed by the Rajasthan High Court, observing that no matrimonial bond remained between the couple, who had been living separately since 2008.

The bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, while confirming the decree of divorce, directed the husband to pay Rs. 50 lakh as permanent alimony to his wife, a practicing advocate, to secure her financial stability and future.

The couple got married on April 18, 2008, according to Hindu rites and customs. Barely eight months after the marriage, the wife left her matrimonial home on December 22, 2008, stating that she wanted to prepare for the judicial services examination.

The husband alleged that she never returned, and that the marriage was never consummated. He also accused her of concealing her true age before marriage, claiming that she was about two and a half years older than him. He contended that she chose to focus on her legal career instead of resuming their marital relationship.

After waiting nearly four years, the husband filed a divorce petition on December 21, 2012, under Sections 13(1)(a) and 13(1)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, citing cruelty and desertion. He told the court that despite several attempts at reconciliation, his wife showed no inclination to return to the matrimonial home.

In 2016, the wife filed a separate petition under Section 9 of the Act seeking restitution of conjugal rights, asserting that she was willing to cohabit with her husband. However, the Family Court found her plea insincere, noting that she had made no genuine effort to resume cohabitation in the years following her departure.

On May 4, 2019, the Family Court allowed the husband’s petition for divorce and dismissed the wife’s plea for restitution. It observed that the wife had chosen to pursue her professional ambitions and had even contested and won elections to the local Bar Association at Chippa Barod City. Efforts to reconcile through mediation failed.

Challenging this decision, the wife approached the Rajasthan High Court through two civil miscellaneous appeals. However, the High Court, by its order dated March 27, 2023, upheld the Family Court’s findings. The division bench noted that the wife had left the matrimonial home within months of marriage and never demonstrated any real intent to return. Court also observed that her petition for restitution of conjugal rights, filed four years after the divorce case, lacked bona fides and appeared to be a defensive measure.

Aggrieved, the wife moved the Supreme Court. During the hearing, the apex court noted that the parties had been living separately since December 2008 and that all efforts at reconciliation had failed. “It is evident that no matrimonial bond remains between them and that neither party has any real intention to restore the relationship,” the bench said.

Court also took note that the husband had remarried on May 3, 2023, and observed that there was no purpose in continuing a legal relationship that had long ceased to exist in substance. Upholding the concurrent findings of the Family Court and the High Court, the Supreme Court dismissed the wife’s appeal.

While confirming the divorce, the bench directed the husband to pay Rs. 50 lakh as permanent alimony. Court noted that although the wife was a practicing advocate, she was still entitled to financial security. The husband, who runs a construction business as a Class-C contractor with the Nagar Nigam, Pali, was ordered to pay the amount within three months.

“The respondent-husband continues to bear a duty to provide alimony to the appellant-wife so as to maintain her financial stability and reasonably secure her future,” court said.

Case Title: Pankaj Shukla Vs Deepak Chaturvedi

Judgment Date: November 13, 2025

Bench: Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta