Why in News: The Delhi High Court, in Shelly Mahajan vs. Bhanushree Bahl & Anr (2024), permitted a spouse to seek damages from a third party for deliberately disrupting a marriage, reviving the Alienation of Affection tort.
Concept and Legal Basis
1. Alienation of Affection (AoA) is a common law “heart-balm” tort allowing a spouse to sue a third party for willful interference in marriage.
2. It protects the legal interests of marriage — companionship, consortium, affection, and support.
3. Though not codified in India, it is not barred by statute either.
4. Pinakin Mahipatray Rawal (2013) – recognised AoA as an intentional tort.
5. Indra Sarma (2013) – held that even children can claim loss of affection against a third party.
Judicial Context and Comparison
1. In the U.S., AoA survives only in six States (e.g., North Carolina, Utah, Mississippi); most have abolished it.
2. U.S. courts require proof of (a) genuine marital love, (b) its loss, and (c) malicious third-party interference.
3. Most States rejected AoA as archaic and incompatible with privacy rights.
4. In Joseph Shine vs. Union of India (2018), adultery was decriminalised but retained as a civil wrong.
5. Thus, the Delhi HC ruling does not contradict Joseph Shine, as it concerns civil—not criminal—liability.
Delhi High Court’s Findings and Implications
1. Held that civil courts, not family courts, have jurisdiction since AoA is an independent civil injury.
2. Laid a three-fold test – (i) intentional wrongful conduct, (ii) clear causation, (iii) measurable loss.
3. Recognised that adultery can still attract civil damages, despite being decriminalised.
4. Reinforces marital sanctity and accountability while respecting personal autonomy.
5. Opens a new legal avenue, signalling a shift toward civil protection against marital interference.
Way Forward
1. Need for legislative clarity to define limits and safeguards of AoA.
2. Ensure suits are restricted to intentional and proven misconduct to prevent misuse.
3. Promote conciliation and mediation before resorting to tort claims.
4. Strengthen privacy and dignity principles alongside marital protection.
5. Balance individual liberty with societal interest in the stability of marriage.
UPSC Relevance:
GS Paper II: Issues related to the judiciary, marriage laws, and civil rights; interpretation of Article 21 (right to life, dignity, and privacy).
Mains Practice Question
Q. “While adultery is no longer a criminal offence in India, its civil implications continue to evolve.” Discuss in light of the Delhi High Court’s recognition of the tort of Alienation of Affection.