Madras High Court quashes Family Court’s direction for medical examination to ascertain female impotency due to hormonal imbalance and irregular periods; says, it damages self esteem

Madras High Court

Madras High Court: In a case where husband (‘respondent’) filed for annulment of marriage alleging suppression by wife regarding her hormonal imbalance and irregular periods resulting in non-consummation of marriage, R N Manjula J. quashed Family Court’s ruling that directed the wife ‘revision petitioner’ to undergo medical examination of the same and even went ahead to direct medical examination of her genitals which was beyond the scope of the original petition.

A petition was filed by the husband seeking to declare the marriage with his wife as null and void alleging that his wife is unfit for marital life and she did not cooperate with him for conducting happy married life and admitted to having irregular periods and hormonal imbalance. During the pendency of this proceeding, an interim application was filed seeking medical examination of the wife on the ground that she herself admitted of her irregular periods and hormonal imbalance for which she has taken treatment yet no document has been produced to corroborate the same. Thus, Additional Sub Court, Coimbatore allowed the petition directing the wife for medical examination. Assailing this, present civil revision petition was filed by the wife.

Counsel for revision petitioner submitted that the medical examination was ordered to ascertain whether she had taken treatment for her health issues in order to examine about her Hormonal imbalance and irregular periods, which is beyond the scope of the pleadings made in the original petition and just to damage her self-esteem the Trial Judge also ordered for examination of the genital organs of the revision petitioner in the guise of referring the revision petitioner for examining the complaint of hormonal imbalance and menstrual irregularity even though she has admitted the fact of non-consummation of marriage and menstrual irregularity.

It is interesting to note that in counter of the main petition regarding annulment of marriage, the wife stated that it was the husband who was unwilling to share the bed with her and even when she asked him to go for medical examination, he did not concede and since the revision petitioner had irregular periods, she informed the respondent and both of them went for medical examination; even on the advice of the doctor, the husband omitted to produce the report of his sperm count.

 

The Court noted that for these kinds of allegations, it would have been better if the Trial Judge had ordered for medical examination of both the parties. When the revision petitioner has stated that she does not suffer from any structural defect of the genitals and her problem is only with regard to hormonal imbalance, such condition cannot be construed as impotency.

 

The Court remarked “The Trial Judge has gone to an extent further and observed in his order that the revision petitioner should prove satisfactorily that she is fit to have sexual relationship and to conceive a child. Trial Judge ordered the revision petitioner to also undergo the examination of her genitals along with the other examinations connecting to irregular periods and hormonal imbalance”

Thus, the Court observed that when the revision petitioner herself admitted about the non-consummation of marriage and the reason for it is the non-cooperation on the side of the respondent, to subject the revision petitioner for medical examination and that too for examining her genitals, would only affect her self-esteem.

As the Trial seems to have been completed and matter is at the stage of pronouncing judgment, thus the Court directed the Family Court to pass appropriate order based on evidence available on record instead of directing the revision petitioner wife for medical examination.

[Natchal v V Chokkalingam, CRP (PD) No. 942 of 2022, decided on 29-07-2022]


Advocates before Court

For Petitioner: Mr. V. Vijayakumar

For Respondent: Mr. S. Sithirai Anandan


*Arunima Bose, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.