Can You Divorce Before One Year of Marriage? Delhi High Court Says Yes—But With Conditions : Sankalp Singh vs Prarthana Chandra (Delhi High Court, 1 March 2013)

 

Sankalp Singh vs Prarthana Chandra (Delhi High Court, 1 March 2013), highlighting the key facts, legal issue, law laid down, and its significance:

---

🧾 Sankalp Singh vs Prarthana Chandra

Citation: FAO No. 312 of 2012 | Date of Decision: 01.03.2013
Coram: Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul & Justice Rajiv Shakdher
Court: Delhi High Court

🧩 Background & Key Facts:

• The parties were married on 19.02.2012 under Hindu rites.

• The marriage remained unconsummated and the couple separated within two months (on 12.04.2012).

• They filed a petition under Section 13B(1) (mutual consent divorce) and sought a waiver of the statutory 1-year separation period under Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA).

• The Family Court dismissed their petition citing that the one-year requirement was mandatory and not waivable except by the Supreme Court under Article 142.

⚖️ Key Legal Issue:

Can the one-year separation requirement under Section 13B(1) be waived by invoking the proviso to Section 14(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in cases of divorce by mutual consent?

📜 Legal Provisions Discussed:

• Section 13B(1) – Requires one year of separation before filing for mutual consent divorce.

• Section 14(1) – Prohibits filing for divorce within one year of marriage, but allows waiver if there is “exceptional hardship” or “exceptional depravity.”

🧠 Law Laid Down:

The High Court held:

1. Section 13B(1) is subject to the HMA, including Section 14.

2. Though mutual consent divorces don't involve allegations of fault, the parties can still jointly present the facts of exceptional hardship or depravity—even in sealed cover—to seek leave under the proviso to Section 14(1).

3. Courts can entertain a first motion petition under Section 13B(1) before one year of separation if exceptional circumstances exist, but:

   • Decree of divorce cannot be granted until one year of separation has passed.

   • The six-month waiting period between the first and second motions must still be followed (cannot be waived except by Supreme Court under Article 142).

🧩 Outcome:

• The impugned order of the Family Court was set aside.

• The case was remanded back to allow the parties to place evidence (even in sealed cover) supporting exceptional hardship under the proviso to Section 14(1).

• The Family Court was directed to reconsider the first motion in light of this.

🧭 Significance:

This judgment:

• Harmonizes Sections 13B and 14 of the HMA.

• Offers procedural flexibility in genuine cases without diluting statutory safeguards.

• Clarifies that early divorce by mutual consent is possible under exceptional conditions, but without waiving core requirements like one-year separation before decree and the six-month reflection period.