ORDER : 1. This transfer petition under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Order LXI(1) of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, seeking transfer of H.M.A.No.1200/2024 filed under Section 12(1)(a) and 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955 [Hereinafter "HMA"] from the Court of Family Judge No.1, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur (Rajasthan) to the Court of the Principal Family Judge, Family Court, Dwarka, has been filed by the petitioner-husband. 2. This petition arose in the following circumstances: 2.1 Both the petitioner and the respondent are lawyers by training and profession, having met while at college. Their relationship, which began in the year 2007, progressed to their betrothal in February 2013 and culminated in marriage on 30th January 2015 at Jaipur. Their pursuit of law as a profession was also a joint exercise. 2.2 Both being practicing advocates in Delhi/NCR, they resided together since marriage till 13th March 2022. For reasons not warranting disclosure, parties parted ways since then. Attempts by elders and well-wishers did not yield any positive resolution in the amicable solution of issues arising from matrimonial discord. 2.3 However, in February 2023, there was some short-lived consensus that they should make attempts to start life afresh, which also could not fructify. 2.4 They met once again on 15th April 2023 when the gifts exchanged between the families during the marriage ceremony were returned. 2.5 Later on, several proceedings under different statutes were initiated by the parties. We refrain from referring to the allegations made therein. 3. Finally, seeking divorce, proceedings before the Court of Family Judge No.1, Jaipur, were filed by the respondent-wife in the month of September 2024. Since both parties are undisputedly residing in Delhi, hence, this transfer petition by the husband. 4. When this matter came up for consideration before Hon'ble Judge in Chambers on 11th November, 2024, this Court made the following order : "1. Registry is directed to mask the identity of both the parties. 2. Issue notice. Ms. Megha Karnwal, learned Advocate on-Record who appears on caveat accepts notice. Service of notice is dispensed with. 3. The counsel for the parties agree for a mediated settlement. 4. In view of the above, we consider it proper to refer the matter to the Mediation Centre attached to this Court. 2. Issue notice. Ms. Megha Karnwal, learned Advocate on-Record who appears on caveat accepts notice. Service of notice is dispensed with. 3. The counsel for the parties agree for a mediated settlement. 4. In view of the above, we consider it proper to refer the matter to the Mediation Centre attached to this Court. The parties shall appear before the Coordinator of the Supreme Court Mediation Centre on 28th November, 2024 at 11:00 a.m. either physically or through video conferencing facility. 5. Thereafter, it will be at the discretion of the Mediator nominated by the Coordinator to allow virtual appearance of the parties or to insist for the physical presence as may be necessary. 6. The mediation report may be submitted within two months. 7. In the meanwhile, further proceedings in HMA No.1200/2024 titled as "YYY Vs. XXX" pending before the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Jaipur, Rajasthan shall remain stayed, until further orders." However, the mediation remained unsuccessful. 5. The respondent wife filed I.A.No.45574 of 2025 seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of irretrievable breakdown as per this Court's power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. In such application, it is averred that the present is a fit case for exercise of this extra-ordinary jurisdiction, inter alia, on the grounds that : A. Parties have been separated since 13th March 2022, i.e., for more than three years and the marriage has irretrievably broken down. B. There is absolutely no chance of the marriage surviving, and as such, continuation of the same, even if only on paper, adds to the misery of the parties and their families. 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. Sanjiv Khanna, J. (as His Lordship then was), writing for the Constitution Bench in Shilpa Sailesh (supra) observed in paragraph 33 of the judgment, as under: "33. Having said so, we wish to clearly state that grant of divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage by this Court is not a matter of right, but a discretion which is to be exercised with great care and caution, keeping in mind several factors ensuring that 'complete justice' is done to both parties. Having said so, we wish to clearly state that grant of divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage by this Court is not a matter of right, but a discretion which is to be exercised with great care and caution, keeping in mind several factors ensuring that 'complete justice' is done to both parties. It is obvious that this Court should be fully convinced and satisfied that the marriage is totally unworkable, emotionally dead and beyond salvation and, therefore, dissolution of marriage is the right solution and the only way forward. That the marriage has irretrievably broken down is to be factually determined and firmly established. For this, several factors are to be considered such as the period of time the parties had cohabited after marriage; when the parties had last cohabited; the nature of allegations made by the parties against each other and their family members; the orders passed in the legal proceedings from time to time, cumulative impact on the personal relationship; whether, and how many attempts were made to settle the disputes by intervention of the court or through mediation, and when the last attempt was made, etc. The period of separation should be sufficiently long, and anything above six years or more will be a relevant factor. But these facts have to be evaluated keeping in view the economic and social status of the parties, including their educational qualifications, whether the parties have any children, their age, educational qualification, and whether the other spouse and children are dependent, in which event how and in what manner the party seeking divorce intends to take care and provide for the spouse or the children. Question of custody and welfare of minor children, provision for fair and adequate alimony for the wife, and economic rights of the children and other pending matters, if any, are relevant considerations. We would not like to codify the factors so as to curtail exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India, which is situation specific. Some of the factors mentioned can be taken as illustrative, and worthy of consideration." 8. We would not like to codify the factors so as to curtail exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India, which is situation specific. Some of the factors mentioned can be taken as illustrative, and worthy of consideration." 8. Having considered the law as aforesaid, we are of the view that the factors discussed by the Constitution Bench, as applied to this case, as also the attending facts and circumstances of the case, would justify the grant of divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage to which, now the parties also agree. 9. Granted that the period of separation is below the 6-year time period, we find that in these facts, this amount of time of the matrimonial relationship is sufficient. The parties have no children from their wedlock, are independent, educated professionals, and that no money is to exchange hands as alimony. All this weighs with us in concluding that the parties shall be able to go on with their independent lives with fair ease and without the burden of this marriage, which appears to have no positive outcome in store for the future. 10. The application under Article 142 of the Constitution of India seeking a decree of divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage is accepted. All proceedings inter se the parties shall stand closed as a consequence. Also, all allegations made therein or thereby, including in the present petition, shall stand expunged. The parties, with a view to maintaining their privacy, are directed to refrain from sharing any photograph of their relationship on any social media platform. 11. The petition is disposed of in the above terms. Registry to draw the decree accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.