Bringing an end to a long-running and bitter matrimonial dispute, the Supreme Court on Tuesday dissolved the marriage between Neha Lal and Abhishek Kumar, observing that their relationship had completely broken down beyond repair.
The couple had been living separately for over 13 years, fighting more than 40 legal cases across multiple courts. The top court said continuing the marriage would only prolong misery and litigation.
The judgment was delivered by a Bench of Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Manmohan while deciding a transfer petition filed by the wife.
Background of the Case
Neha Lal and Abhishek Kumar were married on 28 January 2012. However, the marriage collapsed within just 65 days, after which the couple began living separately from April 2012.
Over the years, the dispute snowballed into a complex web of cases - including:
- Maintenance proceedings
- Domestic violence cases
- Criminal complaints
- Divorce petitions
- Perjury applications
- Appeals before High Courts
Cases were pending in Delhi, Ghaziabad, Lucknow, and Allahabad, with both sides accusing each other of harassment and misuse of legal process.
The wife approached the Supreme Court seeking:
- Transfer of a perjury case from Delhi to Lucknow
- Dissolution of marriage under Article 142 of the Constitution, citing irretrievable breakdown
Court’s Observations
The Bench noted that the couple had been engaged in continuous litigation for more than a decade, with no possibility of reconciliation.
“The parties have been living separately since 2012. There is no emotional bond left, and repeated legal battles show that the marriage has broken beyond repair,” the Court observed.
The judges took note of:
- More than 40 cases filed between the parties
- Failed mediation attempts
- Absence of cohabitation for over 13 years
- No children from the marriage
- Deep bitterness and hostility
Referring to its earlier Constitution Bench ruling in Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan, the Court reiterated that it has the power under Article 142 to dissolve a marriage even without mutual consent.
“The continuance of a dead marriage only adds to suffering. Where reconciliation is impossible, the Court must step in to do complete justice,” the Bench said.
Why Article 142 Was Invoked
The Court clarified that although irretrievable breakdown is not a ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, the Supreme Court can still dissolve a marriage using its constitutional powers.
The Bench observed:
- The couple lived together for only 65 days
- Litigation continued for over a decade
- Mediation failed
- No chance of reunion existed
“Continuation of such a marriage serves no purpose except prolonging mental agony,” the Court remarked.
Court’s Final Decision
- Marriage dissolved under Article 142
- All matrimonial disputes closed
- No alimony awarded, as the wife did not seek it
- Pending matrimonial cases quashed
- Perjury-related cases to continue independently
- ₹10,000 cost imposed on each party
The Court made it clear that while matrimonial disputes would end, cases involving alleged perjury would proceed, stating:
“No one can be allowed to pollute the stream of justice.”
Key Takeaway from the Judgment
The Supreme Court strongly reiterated that:
- Marriage should not become a lifelong legal battle
- Courts should not be used as weapons for personal vendetta
- Irretrievable breakdown is a valid ground for divorce under Article 142
- Endless litigation harms both parties and the justice system
The Bench concluded that forcing the couple to remain legally tied would serve no social or legal purpose.
Case Title: Neha Lal vs Abhishek Kumar
Case Number: Transfer Petition (Crl.) No. 338 of 2025
Decision Date: 20 January 2026
