Calling Husband Impotent Without Proof Amounts to Cruelty: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has ruled that a wife making unsubstantiated claims of her husband’s impotency constitutes cruelty under Section 13(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The ruling came as the court overturned a family court decision that had dismissed the husband’s divorce petition.
Case Overview
A bench comprising Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav and Justice K.S. Hemalekha observed that the wife’s allegations had caused mental anguish and damage to the husband’s reputation. The husband claimed that after a cooperative start to their marriage, the wife’s behavior changed drastically. She allegedly refused to perform household duties and accused him of being unfit to fulfill his marital responsibilities.
The wife reportedly disclosed these accusations not only to the husband but also in the presence of relatives, causing him embarrassment and mental distress. These actions made it intolerable for him to continue the marriage, prompting his divorce petition.
Legal Arguments
Husband’s Advocate’s Argument:
Advocate Srinand A. Pachchapure stated that the wife not only disrespected her husband and in-laws but also made baseless allegations of impotency, subjecting the husband to mental and emotional suffering.
Wife’s Defense:
The wife contended that the marriage was not consummated due to no fault of hers. She claimed this raised doubts about her husband’s ability to perform marital obligations but expressed her willingness to continue the marriage.
Court Observations
The court reviewed the records and found no evidence to support the wife’s claims. It emphasized that false allegations of impotency, especially made publicly, harm the husband’s reputation and cause severe mental agony.
The bench remarked:
- No Proof Provided: The wife failed to prove her allegations, while the husband even expressed willingness to undergo medical examination.
- Mental Cruelty: False allegations of impotency, especially in public, amount to cruelty under the Hindu Marriage Act.
- Reputation at Stake: A prudent woman would avoid making such allegations publicly to protect her husband’s reputation.
Court Decision
The High Court dissolved the marriage and granted the husband’s appeal. It upheld the family court’s maintenance order, requiring the husband to pay ₹8,000 per month as alimony to the wife until she remarries.
Be a part our social media community:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IndianMan.in?mibextid=ZbWKwL
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/indianman.in?igsh=MWZ2N3N0ZmpwM3l3cw==
