RIZWAN YOUSUF QAZI VS. SHAZIYA SHAH, 2025 (CM(M) 488/2025)
November 19, 2025
Divorce Lawyer Specialist In Noida – Family, Matrimonial & Divorce Expert (Mutual & Contested Divorce) – Advocate AK Tiwari
November 20, 2025SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT 2025: FAMILY COURT MUST ASCERTAIN RESPONSIBILITY FOR MARITAL BREAKDOWN – DR. ANITA VS. INDRESH GOPAL KOHLI
Name of the Court: Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court of India delivered a significant judgment in Dr. Anita vs. Indresh Gopal Kohli on 14 November 2025, addressing crucial issues concerning divorce, cruelty, desertion, and the role of Family Courts in determining responsibility for marital breakdown. The appeal was filed by Dr. Anita (wife) against the Uttarakhand High Court’s 2019 decision, which had granted a divorce in favor of her husband, Indresh Gopal Kohli, on grounds of cruelty under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The Supreme Court granted leave, heard the matter, and allowed the appeal in part, setting aside the High Court’s decree and remanding the case for fresh adjudication.
The couple married on 20 May 2009, and a male child was born on 7 March 2010. Shortly after, marital disputes emerged. The husband first filed for divorce in 2010 on grounds of cruelty but withdrew the case. In 2013, he filed another petition under Section 13(1)(i)(b) alleging desertion by the wife. The trial court dismissed his petition on 15 February 2018. On appeal, the High Court accepted the husband’s version, granted divorce, and concluded that the wife had subjected him to mental cruelty.
The Supreme Court observed that the High Court had mainly relied on the husband’s oral statements while entirely ignoring core contentions raised by the wife. She had clearly stated that she was thrown out of the matrimonial home and was forced to live separately. She also retained custody of the minor child from the beginning. Despite these critical points and her deposition supporting them, the High Court had not examined them. The Supreme Court noted that before granting divorce, the Court must determine whether the wife left voluntarily (desertion) or was expelled (cruelty by the husband).
The Supreme Court held that three crucial issues required determination by the High Court:
-
Whether the wife was expelled from the matrimonial home or deserted on her own.
-
Whether withdrawing the first divorce petition on cruelty bars a second petition based on the same facts.
-
Whether the husband himself committed cruelty by not allowing the wife to return and by denying emotional and financial care to the minor child.
The Court emphasized a growing trend where courts assume that prolonged separation automatically means irretrievable breakdown of marriage. It warned that such assumptions can be harmful, especially when children are involved. Instead, courts must thoroughly examine who is responsible for the breakdown, the social context, evidence on record, and overall conduct of both spouses. The Supreme Court found that the High Court did not conduct such an analysis.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court set aside the 2019 judgment and remitted the case back to the High Court of Uttarakhand for fresh consideration. Both parties were directed to appear before the High Court on 24 November 2025.
