Yuzvendra Chahal's Divorce Plea Fast-Tracked, HC Waives 6-Month Cooling Period

The Bombay High Court expedited the divorce-by-mutual-consent case of cricketer Yuzvendra Chahal and his estranged wife, Dhanashree Verma, on Wednesday, exempting them from the compulsory six-month cooling-off period.

Justice Madhav Jamdar ordered the Bandra family court to settle the couple's divorce case by March 20 since Chahal would be occupied after March 21 with his Indian Premier League (IPL) commitments.

Chahal and Verma had filed the petition jointly seeking waiver of the cooling-off period on grounds of mutual consent for divorce. They had also sought an early decision in the matter by the court. The couple appealed against the family court's order dated February 20, rejecting their application to waive the six-month cooling-off period.

Under the Hindu Marriage Act, a couple applying for divorce has to wait for six months before their divorce is sanctioned, aimed at allowing time for reconciliation.

Justice Jamdar, while allowing relief to the couple, recognized that Chahal would be indisposed because of the IPL, which commences on March 22. "The family court is thus directed to pass their divorce application by tomorrow (March 20)," the HC said.

Chahal, who wed Dhanashree Verma in December 2020, had been estranged from her since June 2022, as per their petition. They had approached the court jointly to seek mutual divorce on February 5. The couple also abided by the conditions of mediation in terms of payment of alimony, with Chahal having already remitted Rs 2.37 crore out of the agreed amount of Rs 4.75 crore.

But the family court had rejected waiving the cooling-off period on grounds of partial compliance with the alimony conditions. The court also invoked a report submitted by a marriage counselor stating that attempts at mediation were only partly complied with.

In its judgment, the Bombay High Court observed that Chahal and Verma were separated for over two and a half years and had been abiding by the terms of consent, which specified that the second installment of alimony would be paid upon the divorce decree. The court held that there were no impediments to granting the petition, setting aside the order of the family court.