Supreme Court Orders Divorce, Quashes Interlinked Matrimonial and Criminal Proceedings and Grants Custody to Mother

A bench of Chief Justice B. R. Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih heard transfer and special leave petitions arising out of protracted matrimonial and criminal litigation between a husband and wife and their respective families. The Court dealt with cross petitions seeking transfer of multiple proceedings between Rohini Family Court, Delhi and courts in Hapur, Uttar Pradesh, challenges to orders of the Allahabad High Court, and broader relief to bring finality to disputes arising from the marital breakdown.

The Court recorded a settlement between the parties and issued comprehensive directions to implement it. It held that "the mother shall have the custody of the child" and provided visitation rights to the father with initial supervised access and later monthly visits "on the first Sunday of every month" and half of vacation periods. The Court noted that the wife had "voluntarily agreed to forgo and waive her claim to any alimony or maintenance" and therefore quashed the maintenance order of Rs. 1,50,000 per month earlier passed by the Allahabad High Court. The Court, in its reasoning, observed: "To bring an end to the protracted legal battle between the parties and to secure complete justice, all pending criminal and civil litigations filed by either party against the other, including but not limited to those against the Wife, the Husband, and his family members, in any court or forum in India as mentioned in Paras 4A, 4B and 4C (i) to (iii) above, are hereby quashed and/or withdrawn. Additionally, the incidental matters/ cases/ proceedings filed by third parties against the husband/wife and his/her family members & relatives, related/unrelated to the matters between the parties are hereby quashed and/or withdrawn. The respective courts/authorities are directed to treat these proceedings as terminated and shall not be challenged in any court of law in future." Acting under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Court directed dissolution of the marriage and ordered the decree of divorce to be drawn.

Background: The parties married in December 2015 and separated in October 2018; a daughter born of the marriage was eight years old at the time of the order. Since separation, both sides instituted multiple criminal, civil, family and quasi‑judicial proceedings across Delhi and Uttar Pradesh — including FIRs, complaints under the Domestic Violence Act, criminal breach of trust complaints, maintenance proceedings and civil suits — many of which were pending in Hapur and Rohini courts. The wife challenged the Allahabad High Court’s June 13, 2022 orders in SLPs before the Supreme Court; the husband sought transfer of several Hapur proceedings to Rohini.

The parties informed the Court that they wished to amicably resolve all disputes, including custody, and the Court heard senior counsel for both sides. After recording undertakings and a detailed settlement, the Court made custody, visitation and property transfer directions, quashed the listed proceedings and required an unconditional apology by the wife and her parents to the husband’s family to be published in national newspapers and social media — the Court clarified that the apology "shall not be construed as an admission of liability." The Court also directed transfer of specified land by the wife’s mother to the husband on an "as is where is" basis and ordered police protection for the husband’s family. The Court retained the Allahabad High Court’s guidelines in paras 32–38 of the impugned judgment regarding constitution of Family Welfare Committees aimed at safeguarding against misuse of Section 498A, IPC. The transfer petitions and special leave petitions were disposed of in terms of the settlement; the decree of divorce was to be prepared accordingly. The Court warned that any further proxy proceedings or initiation of fresh litigation by either side would amount to contempt.

Case No.: Transfer Petition (C) No. 2367 of 2023; 2025 INSC 883 Case Title: Shivangi Bansal v. Sahib Bansal Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Senior Counsel For the Respondent(s): Mr. Vikas Singh, Senior Counsel