21 January 2026 Legal Updates

Supreme Court Flags AI-Generated & Fabricated Evidence in Matrimonial Cases; Calls for Mediation Over Criminalisation

(a) Case Title:

• Neha Lal v. Abhishek Kumar

(b) Court:

• Supreme Court of India

(c) Date of Decision:

• January 2026

(d) Bench:

• Justice Rajesh Bindal, Justice Manmohan

Facts of the Case

The parties were married in 2012 and cohabited for only about 65 days. Thereafter, they remained embroiled in intense litigation for over 13 years, initiating more than 40 legal proceedings against each other across multiple courts and jurisdictions.

The disputes included divorce petitions, maintenance proceedings, cases under Section 498A IPC, Domestic Violence Act complaints, execution petitions, perjury applications, writ petitions, and repeated transfer petitions.

The wife approached the Supreme Court seeking transfer of proceedings initiated by the husband. During pendency, mediation was explored but failed. Subsequently, the wife filed an application under Article 142 of the Constitution, seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage.

Issues Raised

• Whether the marriage had irretrievably broken down, warranting dissolution under Article 142?
• Whether rampant false allegations and fabricated evidence in matrimonial disputes undermine the justice system?
• Whether courts should prioritise mediation and reconciliation over criminal prosecution in matrimonial disputes?

Contentions of the Petitioner (Wife)

• The marriage had completely broken down, with no possibility of reconciliation.
• Prolonged litigation had caused mental cruelty and exhaustion.
• Continued marital bond served no social or legal purpose.
• Sought exercise of extraordinary powers under Article 142 to dissolve the marriage and bring quietus to litigation.

Contentions of the Respondent (Husband)

• Opposed dissolution of marriage.
• Relied upon multiple proceedings and allegations pending against the wife.
• Contended that the disputes should be adjudicated through existing legal remedies rather than extraordinary constitutional powers.

Court’s Reasoning & Key Findings

1. Abuse of Matrimonial Litigation & AI-Generated Evidence

The Court expressed grave concern that:

• Parties increasingly fabricate evidence, sometimes using artificial intelligence, to strengthen false cases.
• Matrimonial disputes are often converted into legal warfare to “teach the other side a lesson”.

“Evidence is collected and, in some cases, even created, which is more often in the era of artificial intelligence. False allegations are rampant.”

2. Preference for Mediation & Counselling

The Court laid down a clear dispute-resolution roadmap:

• Pre-litigation mediation should be the first step in matrimonial disputes.
• Courts should explore mediation before calling for replies, even in:
  - Maintenance cases (Section 144 BNSS, 2023 / earlier Section 125 CrPC)
  - Domestic Violence Act proceedings
• Police should prioritise conciliation over registration of FIRs in simple matrimonial disputes.

The Court warned that:

• Even one day of arrest can become a point of no return in marital relationships.

3. Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage

• Parties lived together for barely 65 days, but litigated for 13+ years.
• Over 40 cases demonstrated complete emotional, social and legal breakdown.
• Continuation of marriage would only perpetuate cruelty and litigation.

4. Exercise of Article 142

The Court invoked Article 142 to:

• Do complete justice
• End endless litigation
• Dissolve a marriage that existed only on paper

Final Verdict

• Marriage dissolved by the Supreme Court under Article 142.
• Transfer petition disposed of.
• Court brought finality to all matrimonial disputes between the parties.
• Strong guidelines and observations issued for future matrimonial litigation.

Legal Principles Established

1. Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage

• When marriage is emotionally dead and legally chaotic, courts may dissolve it using Article 142, even without statutory provision.

2. Misuse of Criminal Law in Matrimonial Disputes

• Routine criminalisation of matrimonial disputes defeats reconciliation and escalates conflict.
• False allegations violate fair trial principles under Article 21.

3. AI-Generated & Fabricated Evidence Threatens Justice

Fabrication of evidence, especially using modern technology, undermines:

• Rule of law
• Credibility of judicial process

 4. Mediation as First Constitutional Response

Courts and police must prioritise:

• Mediation
• Counselling
• Reconciliation
  before adversarial litigation.

 5. Article 142 – Power to Do Complete Justice

Article 142 can be used to:

• End prolonged suffering
• Prevent abuse of process
• Restore dignity and mental peace under Article 21