Indian cricket team spinner Yuzvendra Chahal and Dhanashree Verma on Thursday were granted the decree of divorce by the Mumbai family court. Chahal’s lawyer, Nitin Kumar Gupta, confirmed the development while speaking to reporters outside the court. “The court has granted the decree of divorce. The court has accepted the joint petition of both parties. The parties are no longer husband and wife,” advocate Nitin said in a video by ANI. 

Chahal and Verma got married in December 2020. As per their petition, they separated in June 2022. On February 5, they filed a joint petition before the family court seeking divorce by mutual consent.

The Bombay High Court on Wednesday requested the family court to decide the divorce plea by Thursday, considering the fact that Chahal would not be available later as he is participating in the upcoming Indian Premier League (IPL) cricket tournament.

The IPL T20 cricket tournament is scheduled to start from March 22. Chahal is part of the Punjab Kings team.

The HC on Wednesday also waived the six-month cooling period stipulated for every couple after filing of the divorce plea under the Hindu Marriage Act.

The cricketer and Verma had filed a joint petition before the HC, seeking that the cooling-off period be waived in their case as they have applied for divorce by mutual consent.

The petition, filed through advocate Nitin Gupta, had also prayed for a direction to the family court to decide the divorce petition expeditiously.

The couple challenged the family court order of February 20 refusing to waive the cooling-off period.

Under the Hindu Marriage Act, a couple has to undergo six-month cooling-off period before divorce is granted. The objective is to provide time for exploring the possibility of reconciliation.

The family court had refused to waive the cooling-off period on the ground that there was only partial compliance with the consent terms which required Chahal to pay Rs 4.75 crore to Dhanashree.

He had paid Rs 2.37 crore, the family court noted. It also cited a report of a marriage counsellor which said there was only partial compliance with the mediation efforts.

But the high court on Wednesday held that there was compliance with the consent terms, as they provided for the payment of the second installment of permanent alimony only after the decree of divorce was obtained.