Overview The Supreme Court has clarified that a foreign divorce decree cannot be given effect in India unless the opposite party was afforded a genuine opportunity to participate and contest the proceedings before the foreign court. A two‑judge bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta set aside the earlier order of the Bombay High Court , which had recognised the binding nature of a U.S. court’s divorce decree. Key Developments The Supreme Court emphasized the need for procedural fairness and due process in foreign courts when their orders are sought to be enforced in India. The bench overruled the Bombay High Court’s view that a divorce granted on the ground of "irretrievable breakdown of marriage" in the United States could be automatically enforced. The judgment underscores that the Indian judiciary retains discretion to examine the *fairness* of foreign proceedings before invoking the principle of *comity*. Important Facts 1. The case arose from a petition filed by the husband challenging the recognition of a U.S. divorce decree. 2. The Supreme Court held that merely invoking the doctrine of *comity*—respect for foreign judicial decisions—does not override the constitutional guarantee of a fair hearing. 3. The decision re‑affirms that Indian courts must ensure that foreign orders do not contravene public policy or the rights guaranteed under the Constitution. UPSC Relevance This judgment touches upon several topics covered in the UPSC syllabus: Personal Law : The ruling impacts the enforcement of marriage and divorce laws across religious and civil statutes (GS2: Polity). Judicial Review & Comity : Highlights the balance between respecting foreign judgments and safeguarding constitutional rights (GS2: Polity). International Law & Jurisdiction : Clarifies the limits of a foreign court’s <span class="key-term" data-definition="Ju