Skip to content

Bombay Excessive Courtroom refuses to grant divorce to Pune man falsely claiming spouse was HIV optimistic

The bench seemed by means of the medical report and the physician’s deposition earlier than the Pune household court docket and noticed that the girl was certainly not affected by the illness.

Mumbai,UPDATED: Nov 25, 2022 18:11 IST

The court docket mentioned the person had not supplied any actual proof to show his claims of being mentally tortured by his spouse.

By Vidya : The Bombay Excessive Courtroom has dismissed the plea of ​​a person who was in search of divorce from his spouse on the grounds that she was HIV optimistic. The Pune household court docket had dismissed his enchantment after trying by means of the medical report and analyzing a medical practitioner. The excessive court docket did the identical.

The person and lady have been married on March 16, 2003, and after the wedding, the husband claimed that his spouse was affected by Tuberculosis for which he supplied her medical therapy. The husband additional claimed that the spouse was of a whimsical nature, short-tempered and cussed and she or he didn’t behave correctly along with her relations. The husband claimed that there have been fixed fights between him and his spouse due to which he allegedly suffered psychological agony.

READ | Courtroom grants bail to lady accused of pushing HIV contaminated minor into prostitution racket

In December 2004, the spouse was admitted to the hospital as she contracted “herpes”. Throughout her therapy de ella on the hospital, an HIV take a look at was carried out on her de ella, which got here out optimistic, inflicting psychological agony for him and his relations de ella. Subsequently, the spouse allegedly left the home in February 2005.

The person claimed that when the spouse recovered, he took her again to the matrimonial home. Nevertheless, he was mentally disturbed by his spouse’s return from her and so he requested his spouse to return to her mother and father’ home from her.

After two months, the person went to fulfill his spouse when he discovered that she was not in a wholesome situation and so he was not able to deliver her again to the matrimonial home. The person claimed that a physician instructed him that his spouse was nonetheless affected by HIV. It was due to this that the person determined to go for dissolution of their marriage.

ALSO READ | Spouse’s tobacco chewing behavior not a adequate floor for divorce: Bombay Excessive Courtroom

Nevertheless, the spouse challenged this transfer and denied all of the allegations towards her. She mentioned that her HIV take a look at report got here with the end result “not detected”, which meant it was unfavorable. She mentioned that, regardless of the end result, the person went round telling everybody that she was HIV contaminated and due to these rumors she suffered quite a lot of psychological agony and her social life was destroyed.

The lady then made a plea below the Home Violence Act and sought Rs 5 lakh in the direction of damages and a 1-BHK flat in Pune for her lodging. This was opposed by the person.

The bench of Justices Nitin Jamdar and Sharmila Deshmukh famous that amidst all of the allegations leveled by the husband towards the spouse about her habits in the direction of him or his household, he had failed to present particulars of any particular incidents that had taken place and his case was devoid of explicit materials.

ALSO READ | Historical past of Indian courts ruling in favor of intercourse employees

The bench additional acknowledged that: “It’s settled that the cruelty should be of such a nature in order to present rise to an inexpensive apprehension within the thoughts of the person that it’s dangerous or injurious to stay along with his spouse,” whereas on this case no such factor occurred.

On the difficulty of the HIV report, the bench seemed by means of the medical report and the physician’s deposition earlier than the Pune household court docket and noticed that the girl certainly was not affected by the illness, however it was the person who had requested the spouse to depart the home. The bench mentioned that the person “can’t be permitted to make the most of his personal wrongs from him,” and dismissed his plea from him.


Leave a Reply

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