An Indian-origin woman, whose 23-year divorce battle has been dubbed one of the longest in UK legal history, has won a 6.6 million pounds settlement after a High Court judgment.Varsha Gohil filed for divorce in May 2002 and, after accepting an initial modest settlement, became aware of assets her lawyer-husband, Bhadresh Gohil, had failed to declare.Her legal pursuit, meanwhile, was interrupted by a money-laundering investigation, which led to Bhadresh being sentenced to 10 years in prison in 2010 in connection with a corruption case involving a client in Nigeria.While the UK Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) pursued a Confiscation Order over funds of nearly 28 million pounds associated with the husband’s criminal activity, the ex-wife’s legitimate share in the untainted “marital pool” of the funds remained unresolved.According to ‘The Times’, the UK Court of Appeal last month finally ended the lengthy courtroom drama by ruling out any further appeals, which meant a High Court judgment from last year could now take effect.”The husband’s conduct is at the highest end of the scale in terms of dishonesty and its consequences,” Justice Williams said in the ruling dated May 28, 2025.”The wife is now nearing retirement age and has come through the last 23 years with health problems, but financially, she is still afloat.”Given my conclusions on the assets which the wife sought orders in respect of and the other assets which are subject to the Confiscation Order, the marital pool of identifiable untainted realisable assets of around 6,663,172 pounds compared to the realisable assets of 27,967,337.48 pounds amounts to a modest 23.82 per cent,” he said.Regarding the length of the proceedings, the judge noted that the name Gohil will “linger long in the memories of lawyers and judges across a range of jurisdictions” due to the “tortuous route that the case has followed”.Varsha Gohil, now 61 and based in London, had suspected that her husband had not revealed the extent of all his assets despite a legal obligation to do so in divorce cases.The CPS later argued that the assets were entirely the proceeds of crime and should, therefore, only be subject to criminal asset recovery and not go towards the divorce settlement. However, the High Court found that some assets were legitimate businesses during the couple’s marriage, giving the wife a right to the share.Judge Williams took serious note of Bhadresh Gohil’s failure to disclose his true wealth, which had put his family through the “devastation that the litigation and his criminality have wrought”.