When marriage has irretrievably broken down, the 6-month cooling-off period for divorce cannot save the relationship. This was recently hinted at by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Sudha v. Sukhwinder Singh (decided on January 31, 2026). The Bench of Justice Vikas Bahl waived off the 6-month period for divorce by mutual consent. Advocates Abhayjeet Singh and Pragya Malik for the petitioners convinced the Court to accept the mutual plea.
Factual Background
The instant writ petition was brought in jointly by a husband-wife seeking restoration of prior application for waiver of cooling-off period. This is pertaining to the statutory period of six months for recording of the statement of second motion under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
The couple got married in 2019 as per Sikh religious rites and filed for mutual consent divorce on account of temperamental differences. They had been living separately since March 2024 and had reached a settlement on maintenance and property issues. When the matter was adjourned to March 2026, the couple applied for a waiver of cooling-off period of 6-months. They stated that their marriage had irretrievably broken down. However, the waiver application got dismissed by the Trial Court.
Court’s Analysis of 6-Month Cooling-Off Period for Divorce
Scanning through the provision under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, the Court acknowledged the requirement of couples residing separately for 1 year or more for divorce by mutual consent. As per facts, the said condition was satisfied in the instant case. However, the second condition under the provision requires that the second motion should not be made before 6 months and not later than 18 months.
The High Court referred to the Supreme Court’s observation of Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur while deciding Amit Kumar v. Suman Beniwal (2021). The Court had listed certain factors to be considered while waiving 6-Month cooling-off period for divorce. The Apex Court had clarified that the statutory waiting period of 6 months under Section 13B(2) was directory but not mandatory. It reiterated that the Court could exercise its discretion to waive the said requirement based on specific facts of the case.
Looking at the instant matter, the Punjab and Haryana High Court acknowledged the fact that the decision to part ways could not be said to be an impulsive one. Since all the claims including those of maintenance/alimony were already settled and reconciliation attempts failed, irretrievable breakdown of marriage led to the decision of mutual divorce. The High Court was of the view that further delay in deciding the divorce would prolong the agony. Since there was no child born in the wedlock, all aspects stood resolved as per the Court.
Conclusion
The Punjab and Haryana High Court allowed the revision petition for the parties to move the second motion before the Family Court. In turn, the Family Court is directed to prepone the case and give a date within 14 days to decide the matter by passing a final order.
Also read
