Forcible, unnatural sex in marriage is cruelty, hence a ground for divorce: HC

A PUNJAB WOMAN, WHO GOT MARRIED TO A BIHAR RESIDENT IN 2007, HAD ACCUSED HIM OF UNNATURAL SEX; SHE MOVED HC IN 2014

CHANDIGARH: The Punjab and Haryana high court has held that forcible and unnatural sex in a marriage amount to cruelty and is a ground for divorce.

The court said it is easy to level such allegations and even more difficult to prove them and, therefore, courts always have to be cautious while dealing with such allegations.

“Besides on the basis of evidence, the allegations are corroborated by other circumstances that one of the spouses has indulged in unnatural acts, the marriage can be dissolved by a decree of divorce,” the division bench of justices MMS Bedi and Hari Pal Verma said.

A woman from Punjab, who got married to a Bihar resident in 2007, had levelled allegations of sodomy, forcible and oral sex and stated that these were the reasons she was forced to leave him. Forced sex in a marriage is not a criminal offence in India.

In 2010, she left him though she had a child out of the marriage and returned to Punjab to live with her maternal family. Her husband had filed a plea for restoration of conjugal rights in Bihar, which became basis for a Punjab district court dismissing her plea for divorce in 2014. She had moved the high court in 2014.

The woman had alleged that husband was drunkard and would insist she consume liquor. After getting drunk, he would indulge in unnatural sex and on refusal, he would beat her up, she said. The man had denied the allegations while the petitioner failed to give any medical evidence or specific instances of cruelties.

The court observed that no wife having a child will abandon her husband if there are no compelling circumstances. These allegations cannot be proved by any corroborative evidence in the absence of any witnesses nor such allegations can always be proved by medical evidence, the court added.

The woman had also alleged the husband who before marriage claimed to be working with an MNC was not found to be working with the firm as claimed. There were allegations of demanding dowry and not supporting her in studies as promised before marriage.