The Bombay High Court waived the six-month cooling-off period under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act for Indian cricketer Yuzvendra Chahal and Dhanashree Verma’s mutual divorce. The Court noted that they had lived separately for over two and a half years and complied with the agreed alimony terms, leaving no legal impediment to the waiver.
Yuzvendra Chahal and Dhanashree Verma were married in December 2020 and separated in June 2022. They jointly filed a divorce petition before the family court on February 5, 2024, seeking dissolution of marriage by mutual consent and requesting a waiver of the statutory cooling-off period. However, on February 20, the family court denied their request, citing partial compliance with the agreed consent terms. The court noted that while Chahal had committed to paying ₹4.75 crore as permanent alimony, only ₹2.37 crore had been paid at that stage. Additionally, the family court referred to a report from the marriage counselor, which indicated that mediation efforts had not been fully complied with. Dissatisfied with the decision, the couple approached the Bombay High Court for urgent relief.
The petitioners contended that the statutory cooling-off period was unnecessary in their case as they had been living apart for a significant period, and there was no chance of reconciliation. They argued that the consent terms explicitly provided for staggered alimony payments, with the remaining amount payable only after the divorce decree was issued. Relying on the Supreme Court’s 2017 judgment in Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur, they asserted that the cooling-off period could be waived where there was no possibility of settlement.
The Bombay High Court noted that the consent terms had been duly adhered to, as the second installment of the agreed alimony was explicitly linked to the grant of the divorce decree. The Court rejected the family court’s reasoning that partial compliance was a valid ground to deny the waiver, emphasizing that the agreed terms allowed for staggered payments.
Referring to Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur, the Court reiterated that the six-month waiting period under Section 13B(2) is discretionary and not mandatory, provided that there is no scope for reconciliation. The Court held, “Thus, it is clear that there is no impediment in the facts and circumstances of the case in granting the applications… Accordingly, the impugned order dated 20th February is quashed and set aside."
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the family court’s order, and directed that the divorce decree be granted without the statutory waiting period. The Court also instructed the family court to expedite the matter, considering Chahal's upcoming participation in the Indian Premier League (IPL).
Picture Source :
