The Delhi High Court sanctioned divorce to a man, says calling the husband impotent in front of others is mental cruelty.
The division bench of justices Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna granted divorce while hearing the family court order that declined the divorce petition of the man.
According to the petition the couple married in 2011, like any married couple they are also interested in expanding the family by having children. But due to the medical limitation, no natural conception took place and they had to resort to in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment. This couple underwent IVF procedure on two occasions, but they were unable to have the child, due to which their matrimonial differences started surfacing in their life.
The appellant alleged that his wife insulted him, in front of her parents, sisters and other family members by alleging that he was impotent, without any basis. In the year 2021, on Dussehra festival one such incident happened, when his wife discussed her intimate sexual life with him in front of her parents at her parents home. In March 2012 she again humiliated and insulted him by calling him impotent at her parental home. The appellant has claimed that false allegations of impotency were leveled against him again by his wife even though he was perfectly fit and capable of establishing physical relationship for mutual co habitation.
The appellant wife contradicted the allegations that made in the petition. She denied that she ever humiliated the appellant by calling him impotent in the presence of the parents and other family members. She claimed that she was criticized, ill treated and insulted by the family members of the appellant who addressed her as banjh. She also asserted that she was harassed for dowry. However the court found no proof to prove the claim apart from bare allegations and the court said that there is no cogent evidence produced by the respondent to corroborate her allegations of dowry harassment. She has not been able to show any conduct of the appellant or his family members from which it could be concluded that she has been treated with cruelty on account of having brought less dowry.
The bench of justices said that they came to a conclusion that being openly humiliated and called impotent by his wife in front of others and discussing their sexual life in the presence of family members can only be termed as an act of humiliation causing mental cruelty to the appellant.
The court came to the conclusion that the appellant wife detached herself from him on account of his incapacity and decided to leave him and snapped their matrimonial relationship. Such withdrawal of the appellant wife from the matrimonial relationship independently without any reason or base thereby depriving the appellant conjugal bliss, since 2013 till date, can only be inferred as an act of cruelty.
The court said that on the appreciation of the entire evidence as led by the parties are compelled to conclude that the appellant has been subjected to cruelty. Accordingly, the impugned judgment that dismissed the divorce petition is hereby set aside and divorce is granted to the appellant in the ground of cruelty under section 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1995.
(Input from various sources)
(Rehash/Lavanya Beeraboina/MSM)
