Whether parties can dissolve marriage registered under Special Marriage Act by executing divorce deed on stamp paper?

It is the requirement of the statute that once having chosen to be spouses under the Special marriage Act, it is necessary for the parties to take recourse to the very law to even permanently severe the ties. In the instant case, although the marriage took place as mentioned hereinabove under the Special Marriage Act for the reasons best known to respondent No. 4, who claims to have got the purported document executed on the Rs. 100/- stamp paper before the Notary. That itself is raising question mark in relation to this very document. However, we are not presently to adjudicate upon the said issue and any claim made on the strength of the said document or any refusal that comes from the Respondent no. 4 claiming through this document, shall need to be presently denied. For the purpose of writ of habeas corpus, we have chosen not to permit reliance on the said document noticing the very question of validity of this document coupled with serious allegations of against mother of the applicant as all these can be sorted out by the respective parties in the appropriate proceedings.

In the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad

(Before Sonia Gokani and N.V. Anjaria, JJ.)

Chavda Twinkle Vs  State of Gujarat

R/Special Criminal Application No. 2800 of 2020

Decided on July 17, 2020

Citation: 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 1167

Print Page

Whether there can be divorce between husband and wife by divorce deed?

On the contrary it appears that, the divorce was only on the basis of that document (Exhibit 86) which was admittedly executed before an advocate which was prepared by that advocate and it was notarized. Such document cannot severe the relationship or the marital tie. Such mode has no legal force and such practice is against the public policy. 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AURANGABAD BENCH)

Second Appeal No. 124 of 2017, 

Decided On: 11.09.2019

 Sudarshan  Vs.   Pallavi

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Vibha Kankanwadi, J.

Citation: 2020(2) MHLJ 181,AIR 2020(NOC) 69 Bom

Print Page

Whether wife can be denied maintenance on ground that she has relinquished her right to maintenance under divorce deed?

 In another decision of the very coordinate bench in case
of Narendrabhai Chandubhai Shah V/s. State of Gujarat,
reported in 2013 (O) GLHEL-HC-231390 wherein, the Court
has construed the expression of ‘wife’ in the context of Section
125 of Cr.P.C. Here also, a compromise between the parties
took place and the proceedings came to be withdrawn by both
the sides and the decree in terms of compromise took place
and the application filed by the wife seeking maintenance
came to be partly allowed and the Revisional Court confirmed
the order of maintenance. It is in that context it has been held
that a woman who is a wife as per the explanation of Section
125 continues to be the wife even if divorced and not
remarried and she cannot be denied the maintenance under
Section 125. A right of a wife who is in destitute condition to
get the maintenance from her husband is always available to
her. Any compromise or a condition contained in the
agreement held to be against the public policy and not valid
and thereby, after referring the same, the Court has dismissed
the plea of the husband. While passing the judgment, the
Hon’ble Court has also taken into consideration the case of
the Apex Court as referred to above and therefore, in the
opinion of this Court, these two decisions cited learned
counsel for the respondents can come to the rescue and in the
background of these facts and circumstances, the petition
being devoid of merits, deserves to be dismissed.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2267 of 2011

RAJENDRABHAI VIRJIBHAI MAVADIA
V
STATE OF GUJARAT & 3.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J. SHASTRI
Date :5/08/2016
Citation:2016 CRLJ4487 Guj

Print Page

Whether court can grant maintenance to wife when there is divorce deed between husband and wife?

The learned counsel for Applicant heavily relied upon Exh. 48 which is alleged divorce deed. It is not brought on record that there was custom prevailing in the community to which both belongs, in which such customary divorce is permissible. If really such custom was prevailing in their community then there was no occasion for the present petitioner to file Hindu Marriage Petition in the Civil Court, [Sr. Divn.], Ahmednagar. That itself demonstrates that there was no such custom prevailing in the community to which the petitioner and Resp. No. 1 belongs.

 Further that document cannot be considered for the simple reason, it is unregistered document. Further the wife has totally denied that she is signatory to that document. If such is the position, this document cannot be read in evidence, therefore, contention raised on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner is to be rejected. The learned Magistrate found that the petitioner is possessing 1 Hector = 27 Are agricultural land and taking crops like cotton etc. Therefore, the learned court has rightly reached to the conclusion that he has sufficient means to maintain his wife. The learned trial court has not granted full amount which the wife had claimed and has only partly allowed the Cri. Misc. Application by awarding monthly maintenance allowance @ Rs. 200/-. The revisional court has considered all aspects in detail and has found that the Cri. Revn. Appln. needs to be rejected because the applicant therein could not demonstrate case in his favour.

 In view my discussion in foregoing paragraphs and especially there is no perversity appearing in the Judgment and Order of courts below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT
BOMBAY.
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION.
Criminal Writ Petition No. 233 Of 2001.
The State of Maharashtra.
 Ranjana V Harischandra Bhanudas Lande.

Coram : V.M. Deshpande, J.
Date : 25th June, 2014.
Citation: 2014(4)BomCR(Cri)404

Print Page

Whether divorce document can be treated as relinquishment deed for maintenance?

If the “Pharkat Patra” produced in this Court is treated as 
the proof of customary divorce, in that case also, in view of the aforesaid 
provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the husband cannot avoid 

the   liability.     If   there   there   was   the   divorce   under   the   document,   the 
husband   cannot   take   defence   that   the   wife   has   been   living   separate 
without sufficient cause.   If the wife was already living separate, there 
was   sufficient   cause   for   her   and   so,   this   document   cannot   help   the 
husband to avoid the liability.  It is not possible to draw inference that the 

parties are already living separate by mutual consent or the wife was 
living separate without sufficient reason.   It is already observed that in 
view   of   the   facts   of   the   case,   it   cannot   be   inferred   that   there   was 
relinquishment of right of maintenance.  If there was no divorce obtained 
under the document, then in view of the aforesaid provisions, it needs to 
be   held   that   there   was   no   question   of   relinquishment   of   the   right   of 
maintenance. 

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION
  CRIMINAL  WRIT PETITION NO.  4  OF  2011
Sau. Sindhubai Ramesh Landge,
Name after divorce
Sindhu D/o Ramdas More,
V 
Ramesh Dagaa Landge,

CORAM  : T.V. NALAWADE, J. 
Citation; 2014(2)crimes 351 Bom, 2013(4)ABR834, 2013ALLMR(Cri)3252, 2013(3)BomCR(Cri)627, 2013CriLJ3593, III(2013)DMC792, 2014(1)RCR(Criminal)817

Print Page