Supreme Court on Foreign Divorce: Indians Married Under Indian Law Cannot Automatically Get Divorce Abroad

Getting a divorce from a foreign court may not be enough to legally end a marriage solemnised in India. The Supreme Court has clarified that foreign divorce orders cannot automatically be recognised in India if they do not meet the legal requirements governing the marriage.

In a judgment delivered on November 3, 2026, a bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Shree Chandrashekhar refused to quash criminal proceedings against a doctor who married another woman in the United Kingdom after obtaining a divorce from a British court.

The case involved Dr. N. Sridhar Reddy, who had married N. Geetha Prasanthi in Andhra Pradesh in 2003 under Hindu customs and traditions. After moving to the UK for his medical career, the couple's relationship deteriorated, eventually leading to divorce proceedings.

Reddy initially approached an Indian court seeking a divorce, but his petition was dismissed. He later approached the Cambridge County Court in the UK, which granted him a divorce on January 29, 2014, citing irretrievable breakdown of marriage.

However, his first wife had challenged the jurisdiction of the British court. The Supreme Court subsequently held that the foreign divorce decree could not automatically be recognised in India because the ground on which it was granted was not independently recognised under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Why Did the Supreme Court Reject the Foreign Divorce?

The central issue was whether a foreign court could dissolve a marriage solemnised in India by applying divorce laws that differ from Indian matrimonial law.

Under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, divorce can be granted on specific grounds, including cruelty, adultery and desertion. The Act also allows couples to seek divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B.

However, irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not independently listed as a statutory ground for divorce under the Act.

This ground generally refers to a situation in which a relationship has broken down beyond repair, leaving little or no possibility of the couple living together again.

Since the British court granted Reddy's divorce on this basis, the Supreme Court found that the decree did not automatically qualify for recognition under Indian law.

Second Marriage in the UK Led to Bigamy Proceedings

The dispute took another turn when Reddy married Geetha Inturi in Norfolk, UK, on March 3, 2014, following his British divorce.

His first wife later approached the police in Andhra Pradesh, alleging that their marriage had never been legally dissolved in India. In February 2016, she filed a complaint alleging bigamy and criminal conspiracy.

Reddy challenged the criminal proceedings, arguing that his first marriage had already ended through the UK court's order. He also maintained that he had acquired British citizenship and that his second marriage had taken place outside India.

The Supreme Court rejected his arguments, observing that acquiring foreign citizenship does not automatically remove the legal consequences of a marriage solemnised in India. It also held that marrying in another country does not, by itself, prevent legal proceedings if the first marriage continues to remain valid under Indian law.

The court allowed the criminal proceedings against Reddy to continue. However, it quashed the proceedings against his second wife and parents, finding insufficient grounds to proceed against them.

The decision does not amount to a conviction. The allegations against Reddy will be examined in the ongoing criminal proceedings.

How Does Indian Law Recognise Foreign Divorce Decrees?

The Supreme Court also examined Section 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908, which lays down the conditions under which foreign court judgments can be recognised in India.

Under this provision, a foreign judgment may not be considered conclusive if the court lacked proper jurisdiction, the case was not decided on its merits, the judgment failed to recognise applicable Indian law, the proceedings violated principles of natural justice, fraud was involved or the decision supported a claim contrary to Indian law.

In the present case, the Supreme Court found that the foreign divorce decree did not satisfy the necessary legal requirements.

The ruling is particularly relevant for Non-Resident Indians (NRIs) and Indian couples who move abroad for employment, education or permanent settlement. When marriages break down, couples may approach courts in their country of residence. However, the latest judgment makes clear that a foreign divorce order does not automatically dissolve a marriage under Indian law.

This does not mean Indians are prohibited from obtaining divorces abroad. Foreign divorce decrees can be recognised in India if they meet the applicable legal requirements.

Supreme Court Reaffirms Its Earlier Position on Foreign Divorces

The latest ruling follows the legal principles established in the 1991 landmark judgment, Y. Narasimha Rao v. Y. Venkata Lakshmi.

In that case, the Supreme Court held that foreign divorce decrees must satisfy Indian legal requirements before they can be recognised in the country.

The latest decision reinforces this position and highlights the legal risks of entering a second marriage before the first marriage has been validly dissolved.

Under Section 82 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, bigamy can attract imprisonment of up to seven years and a fine, subject to the exceptions provided under the law.

For Indians living overseas, the judgment serves as an important reminder that moving to another country or acquiring foreign citizenship does not automatically change the legal status of a marriage solemnised in India.