On the six-month cooling off rule for divorce

In a radical move, the Supreme court has waived the mandatory six-month waiting period for Hindu divorces. The court said that the wait would only “perpetuate a purposeless marriage and to prolong the agony of the parties” and has now left it up to individual judges to decide whether or not to apply this waiting period for a couple. Previously, a couple would have to go through a 12-month separation period and then a further six-month cooling off period before a couple could go through with a divorce. We ask lawyers and social thinkers if this move will help mitigate the hassle for couples undergoing divorce or if it will lead to more hasty decisions on the their part.

Nageshwar Rao, lawyer
‘the move will help couples who are stuck in bad marriages’ 
It is a welcome move from the judiciary. According to me, the move will help couples who are stuck in bad marriages, giving them an opportunity to move out without any lock-in period. There’s no point in being in a marriage for society’s sake. I hope that, if this ruling comes into existence, it will bring change in the Indian marital system.

Abha Singh, advocate and activist
‘I would say that this is a practical approach’ 
It’s a very positive move because the waiting period that has been removed is unnecessary. What the Supreme Court has said is that if you are already living separately for a year and your issues (like custody matters) are sorted out, and if it is a divorce by mutual consent, only in those cases does the six-month period get waived. Sometimes, you want a resettlement or you want to move ahead, and this compulsory six-month waiting may make you lose out in your rehabilitation.

Six-month waiting was given so that, if there was any iota of a possibility for reconciliation, that could be done. If it is a divorce by mutual consent, there is no chance of reconciliation, since it means that both parties want to move on in life. So, once you’ve decided that it's not possible, there’s no point in making them wait compulsorily for six months and living with the agony. So, I would say that this is a practical approach.

Kirthi Jayakumar, Lawyer and activist 
‘I truly hope that consent is recognised here’
It is a good decision to offer the option of waiving off the cool off period. It leaves it to the parties to decide what they want to do in a case where they have arrived at a decision to mutually separate.  It is also a really impactful move on the future of the judiciary from a trust-building and a case disposal point of view. I truly hope that consent is recognised here and can inform the jurisprudence around criminalising marital rape. The number of divorces won’t increase, because people don’t get divorced simply because it is a legal provision. They have personal reasons.

BRP Bhaskar, 
social thinker‘there is little point in asking the couple to wait’
I consider this a good decision. Where the chances of reconciliation are non-existent there is little point in asking the couple to wait so long for annulment of the marriage. When separation is unavoidable, let the process be made as hassle-free as possible. It is no secret that in India women are ready to stay in abusive marriages for societal reasons. It will be a pity if our legal system, which is notoriously slow, adds to the travails of those who choose the divorce route by imposing unduly rigorous conditions.

Mridula Kadam, Divorce lawyer
‘It simply prolonged the agony and proved to be a hindrance to people starting their lives’ 
It would definitely help couples. When couples are in a contested litigation and they come to an amicable solution, then the six-month period which is given for reconciliation really serves no purpose. It is simply prolonging the agony and proved to be a hindrance to starting their lives. It is a big welcome I think that the courts have said that it is more directory and not mandatory. When a situation like this comes up, the court has certain criteria that will help them to pass judgment as to whether the wait is needed or not. I also don't think that this applies to newly-filed cases. 

It is only in contested cases that this is applicable. The whole purpose of the family court was to see that the parties had reconciled. So, the waiting period had been in place to ensure that people did not do something drastic in a fit of anger, without having any rational thoughts behind it. But then, this waiver of six months is on contested cases, where the parties have already been warring and fighting for years. If you go in with a new mutual consent petition, then I think the six-month period stands.