In a matrimonial dispute where one party was accused of not following the court’s previous orders, the Supreme Court chose not to take strict contempt action. Instead, it sent both parties to mediation and appointed a retired High Court Chief Justice as the Mediator. Next hearing is after eight weeks.
Brief Facts of the Case
This case is about a fight between a husband and wife that has reached the Supreme Court. Earlier court orders were not followed properly, which led to the filing of contempt petitions by one party. The main complaint was that the other side was not obeying the orders passed in a pending matrimonial matter.
The case has now reached a point where the Supreme Court had to decide whether to punish for contempt or find another solution.
Legal Provisions Involved
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – The petition was about disobeying the court’s earlier orders.
- Article 142 of Constitution – Power of Supreme Court to do complete justice, especially in sensitive family matters.
- Matrimonial/Family Law Principles – Though not specifically mentioned, the case involves custody, compliance, or settlement issues.
Arguments by Both Sides
Husband’s Side (Petitioner):
Their senior lawyer told the Court that the wife had not followed previous court directions. The behaviour was willful and needed to be dealt with seriously.
Wife’s Side (Respondent):
Her lawyers said that the matter should not go into contempt and should be resolved peacefully. They supported the idea of mediation.
What the Court Said
The Supreme Court Bench, led by the Hon’ble Chief Justice and Justice K. Vinod Chandran, noted that since it is a matrimonial dispute, strict action should be avoided for now. The Court decided to refer the matter to mediation, with both parties agreeing.
The Court appointed Justice Ritu Bahri, former Chief Justice of the Uttarakhand High Court, as the Mediator. She will look into all the pending issues between the couple. The Court also said her fees can be decided in consultation with both parties.
Next hearing will be after 8 weeks.
Conclusion of the Order
Instead of punishing for contempt, the Supreme Court chose a softer route and gave the couple one more chance to resolve their issues through mediation. The process will be overseen by a respected retired judge. The Court has kept the matter open and will review it again in 8 weeks.
Comments from the authour of this website
This kind of situation is very common in our courts when it comes to husbands stuck in long, painful matrimonial fights.
Here, the husband went to the highest court of the country saying, “Court orders are not being followed.” He wanted justice. But instead of punishing the other side for not listening to court orders, the court again sent both sides for “talks”.
Why? Just because it’s a family matter?
What message does this send?
When a woman does not follow court orders, nothing happens. Instead of facing consequences, she gets another chance. Another hearing. Another mediation. Another delay.
But when a man doesn’t comply, the court comes down heavily. Arrests are made. Police are sent. Media blames him. Society judges him.
This double standard is killing the morale of genuine men fighting false cases.
It shows that even if the court gives a clear order, it can be ignored if you belong to a “protected” group—and the court may still give you benefit of doubt, every single time.
Contempt of court is not a small thing. If one party disrespects the system again and again, and nothing is done, it weakens the entire justice process. Men who are already fighting a lonely battle lose faith in the system.
Final Thoughts
The court must stop treating all matrimonial matters as one-sided emotional issues. Real harm is being done when court orders are ignored. One party should not keep getting protection in the name of “sensitivity”.
It’s time for the courts to see that men also suffer silently, and many face repeated legal harassment under the shield of “matrimonial dispute.”
Laws must apply equally. Orders must be respected by all. Sympathy should not replace accountability.
Read Complete Judgement Here
Leave A Comment