Bombay High Court Annuls Marriage Over Husband’s “Relative Impotency”
The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court has declared a marriage null and void after ruling that the husband’s “relative impotency” prevented the couple from consummating their union. The Court stated that their emotional and physical disconnect justified annulment and that their distress should not be ignored.
A division bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and S.G. Chapalgaonkar delivered the verdict on April 15, 2024, stating that this was a case where the law should support “young sufferers of marriage” who are unable to connect on a mental, emotional, or physical level.
Case Background
The case was brought before the High Court after a 27-year-old man challenged a family court’s refusal to annul his marriage. His 26-year-old wife had sought an annulment at the admission stage, claiming that her husband refused physical intimacy.
- The couple married in March 2023 but separated after just 17 days.
- The woman alleged that the man was reluctant to engage in physical relations, which led her to seek an annulment.
- She argued that her husband suffered from “relative impotency”, meaning he was physically capable of intercourse but unable to perform with her.
Understanding “Relative Impotency”
The Court explained that relative impotency refers to a situation where a person can engage in intercourse but not with their spouse.
“In this case, it is clear that the husband has relative impotency towards his wife, which led to the non-consummation of their marriage,” the Court stated.
Initially, the husband hesitated to admit his condition and even blamed his wife. However, he later openly acknowledged his condition, believing it would not brand him as impotent in general terms.
Family Court’s Rejection and High Court’s Intervention
The wife initially filed for annulment in a family court, asking for the case to be decided at the admission stage under the Civil Procedure Code, instead of going through a full trial.
However, the family court rejected the request, stating that both husband and wife had raised collusive claims.
The High Court overruled this decision, stating that the circumstances clearly justified annulment. It then officially quashed the family court’s order and declared the marriage null and void.
Final Judgment
The Bombay High Court ruled that:
- The husband’s relative impotency was a valid ground for annulment.
- The marriage was never legally complete due to non-consummation.
- The earlier family court ruling was incorrect and was overturned.
Conclusion
This judgment reinforces that a valid marriage requires both emotional and physical compatibility. The Court’s ruling highlights that relative impotency can be a legitimate reason for annulment, ensuring that individuals in unworkable marriages have legal recourse.
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==
