Inability To Conceive A Child Is Not Considered Impotence Nor A Valid Reason For Dissolving A Marriage - Patna HC

The Patna High Court recently held that the inability to conceive a child is not considered impotence nor a valid reason for dissolving a marriage. The court emphasized that the Hindu Marriage Act does not permit divorce on the grounds of infertility. The court acknowledged that being unable to bear a child is a natural aspect of married life, and couples have the option to explore alternatives such as adoption. 

In this case, the court dismissed the husband's appeal challenging the family court's decision to reject his divorce petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The family court had previously dismissed the husband's plea for divorce because he failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his allegations of cruelty against his wife. The husband had accused his wife of improper behavior towards his parents and family during her brief stay at their matrimonial home. He also claimed that she refused to cohabit and consummate the marriage, implying that her intentions were solely to lose her virginity. Additionally, he alleged that she had undisclosed meetings with people from her village despite objections from family members. 

The court was informed that the wife had health issues and had requested financial assistance for treatment. After a medical examination, it was revealed that she had a cyst in her uterus and no eggs, making conception and motherhood unlikely. 

The court observed that the divorce petition was filed within two years of marriage, and the couple had lived together for only two months. The ground of desertion was not established as per Section 13(1)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, which requires continuous desertion for a minimum of two years before filing the petition. 

The court further noted that the husband's claim of cruelty was not adequately supported by concrete evidence, apart from the wife's refusal to live with him. Moreover, the husband had not taken any legal action for the restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, weakening his claim of refusal to cohabit. 

Based on these findings, the court concluded that there was no merit in the husband's appeal, and the family court had rightfully dismissed his petition seeking a divorce. Therefore, the court upheld the family court's decision and dismissed the husband's appeal.