ABSTRACT
The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, marked a transformative moment in Indian legal history by codifying divorce laws; custody of children; maintenance of a spouse after divorce and many more for Hindus and introducing modern legal frameworks to a traditionally sacrosanct institution. This research paper focus on how the act attempts to balance the rights and duties of spouses through provisions like divorce [section 13 ]; restitution of Conjual rights [section 9 ] ; maintenance [section 24-25] . The objective of this research is how does law define and treat cruelty as a ground for divorce; does the concept of restitution of conjugal rights conflicts with personal liberty and how effectively does the maintenance ensure economic justice post- separation. Furthermore, the study discusses the growing call for gender-neutral reforms in divorce laws, critiquing the patriarchal underpinnings of alimony and maintenance provisions. It also explores the impact of global legal norms on Indian divorce laws, emphasizing the importance of equitable asset division and spousal support.The institution of marriage in India, particularly under Hindu law, has undergone significant evolution, mirroring broader societal, cultural, and legal transformations. Historically, Hindu marriage was regarded as a sacramental, indissoluble union, rooted in religious beliefs and rituals. The concept of divorce, as understood in the contemporary legal framework, was virtually non-existent in classical Hindu law. Marriage was considered not just a contractual arrangement but a sacred, lifelong bond that extended beyond death, symbolizing the union of families rather than merely individuals. This traditional view, however, came under scrutiny in the post-independence era, when the need to modernize personal laws and align them with the constitutional ideals of equality and individual freedom became evident. A key issue with the Act is the absence of “irretrievable breakdown of marriage” as a statutory ground for divorce, despite judicial endorsement of this concept in several landmark cases. The lack of explicit legal recognition for this ground results in prolonged litigation for couples whose marriages have effectively ceased to function, but who are unable to obtain a divorce without proving fault, such as cruelty or desertion.
KEY WORDS: Hindu Marriage; cruelty; conjugal rights; divorce; custody of a child