The Telangana High Court has rejected a woman’s plea for divorce and Rs 90 lakh alimony after she alleged that her husband was impotent due to Rheumatoid Arthritis, causing erectile dysfunction. The woman claimed this amounted to cruelty and fraud under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, but the Court ruled her claims were unsubstantiated and lacked credible evidence.
The bench, led by Justices Moushumi Bhattacharya and BR Madhusudhan Rao, upheld the family court’s previous decision, stating there was no proof that her husband was incapacitated or deceitful, nor that the marriage was ever unconsummated.
Allegations and Legal Arguments
The wife based her plea on accusations that her husband concealed his medical condition prior to their 2013 marriage, which later manifested as erectile dysfunction and supposed inability to consummate the marriage, including during their honeymoons in Kerala and Kashmir.
She argued that these physical and emotional hardships constituted “cruelty” and “fraud” under the existing matrimonial law and that a 2017 diagnosis confirmed her husband’s incapacity for marital life and parenthood. The woman further referenced periods of abandonment while the couple lived in the USA and demanded Rs 90 lakh as compensation for her suffering.
Husband’s Defence and Medical Substantiation
Refuting the charges, the husband insisted that the marriage was consummated and that he had engaged in sexual relations on several occasions. He acknowledged a brief episode of erectile dysfunction but provided medical documentation, including a 2021 potency test and a normal sperm count, to corroborate both his physical recovery and his ability to fulfil marital obligations.
The court observed there was no independent testimony or objective medical proof from the wife to support claims of impotence or incapacity, finding her arguments insufficient and inconsistent.
Court’s Ruling and Social Considerations
The High Court decisively rejected the wife’s claims, stressing that after five years of marriage and documented cohabitation in India and the USA, such allegations of unconsummation and fraudulent concealment were unsubstantiated by evidence. The bench noted the wife had not informed family or authorities about these alleged issues during the course of the marriage, which further weakened the credibility of her assertions.
Officially, the Court noted: “We are of the view that the appellant has not made out any case to annul her marriage on the ground that the respondent is impotent and not capable of performing sex, underwent harassment in the hands of respondent and also failed to prove that she is entitled for permanent alimony of Rs 90,00,000/-”.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
This verdict underscores the intricacy of resolving matrimonial disputes involving health and sexual issues, demanding both legal precision and societal empathy.
While judicial systems must protect individuals from genuine cruelty and deceit, society should simultaneously foster sensitivity and understanding towards spouses facing chronic or temporary medical conditions.
