Omar Abdullah odobrio razvod od strane SC, spor s otuđenom suprugom Payal riješen

The Supreme Court on Friday granted a divorce to Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah and his estranged wife, Payal Abdullah, following their mutual agreement to dissolve their 17-year-old marriage. The court confirmed that the couple had resolved all pending legal disputes and agreed to withdraw all cases filed against each other. This marks the culmination of a prolonged legal battle that began over a decade ago. Omar Abdullah and Payal Abdullah married in September 1994 after meeting while working at The Oberoi hotel in Delhi. They have two sons, Zahir and Zamir. The couple lived separately since 2009, with Omar announcing his separation from Payal in 2011, effectively ending their 17-year-long marital relationship. During the course of their marriage, the couple faced multiple legal challenges, including attempts by Omar to secure a divorce based on allegations of desertion and cruelty. Omar initially filed for divorce in 2016, asserting that the marriage had suffered an irretrievable breakdown. However, a family court rejected his petition, stating that he had failed to substantiate his claims of cruelty or desertion. The court also noted that the couple had maintained communication even after the filing of the divorce petition, contradicting claims of a complete breakdown of their relationship. In 2023, the Delhi High Court upheld the family court's decision, dismissing Omar’s appeal and affirming that his allegations lacked sufficient evidence. The Delhi High Court further directed Omar Abdullah to pay ₹1.5 lakh per month as maintenance to Payal and ₹60,000 per month toward the education expenses of one of their sons. These financial obligations were part of the ongoing legal proceedings and added complexity to the case. Despite these rulings, Omar continued to challenge the decisions, eventually leading to a final appeal before the Supreme Court. In April of last year, the Supreme Court mandated that Omar and Payal attempt to resolve their matrimonial disputes through mediation. The court emphasized the need for reconciliation and encouraged the couple to address their differences amicably. This directive led to a series of meetings and discussions, culminating in a mutual agreement to dissolve their marriage. Both parties submitted a joint application to the Supreme Court, requesting dissolution of their marriage by mutual consent and the withdrawal of all pending litigation. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing the couple, informed the Supreme Court that the parties had "embraced freedom" and that all issues had been resolved in a manner satisfactory to both. He stated that the couple had filed an application under Article 142 of the Constitution, seeking dissolution of their marriage by divorce. The court accepted this application and decided to proceed with granting the divorce in accordance with the mutual agreement. Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe, presiding over the case, acknowledged the resolution and expressed their willingness to finalize the matter in light of the couple's agreement. The court emphasized that the resolution marked the end of a long-standing legal dispute and that all future actions would align with the mutual understanding reached by the parties. The decision reflects the court's commitment to resolving complex personal matters through judicial intervention when necessary.