Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kalabai vs Mukesh Kumar on 2 December, 2025
Author: Vishal Dhagat
Bench: Vishal Dhagat
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:62571
1 FA-421-2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL DHAGAT
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE B. P. SHARMA
ON THE 2 nd OF DECEMBER, 2025
FIRST APPEAL No. 421 of 2010
KALABAI
Versus
MUKESH KUMAR
Appearance:
Shri Vinay Kumar Sharma - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Ashwajit Gautam - Advocate for the respondent.
JUDGMENT
Per: Justice Vishal Dhagat Appellant-wife is assailing the judgment dated 19.03.2010 passed by First Additional District Judge, Gadarwara District Narsingpur (M.P.) in HMAC No.35A/2009, whereby her petition filed under Section 12 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for declaring her marriage with respondent on 29.04.2004 null and void and for returning Stridhan valued at Rs 63,000/- and marriage expenses Rs 81,400/- with interest @ 12% per annum has been dismissed.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the marriage of the appellant with the respondent was solemnized according to Hindu rituals on 29.04.2004. After the marriage, the appellant went to reside at her matrimonial home and stayed there until 02.05.2004. However, the marriage was never consummated and there was no physical relationship between the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-12-2025 15:57:07 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:62571 2 FA-421-2010 spouses. Soon after the marriage, the respondent started displaying suspicious and abnormal behaviour. He would stand against the wall, talk to himself, acknowledge the presence of someone who was not there, and laugh without reason. He even ordered the appellant to get off the bed and sleep on the floor. Shocked and frightened, the appellant obeyed him and spent a sleepless night.
3. The next morning, the appellant informed some women in her in- laws' house about the incident. She was then told that the respondent had been of unsound mind since birth. Despite this, the appellant continued to stay with him on 01.05.2004 and 02.05.2004, during which she again experienced the same abnormal behaviour. Upon returning to her mother's house, she narrated the entire incident. Her mother thereafter visited the in-laws' home (Cheech), where she too came to know that the respondent's family had concealed the fact that he was of unsound mind. His behaviour with the appellant also indicated that he was impotent. Feeling deceived and betrayed, the appellant refused to continue living with the respondent. Consequently, on 15.10.2004, she filed a petition under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking a declaration that the marriage dated 29.04.2004 be declared null and void. The appellant also contended that her mother had spent a considerable amount on the marriage, including jewellery and household items given to the respondent's family, and had incurred substantial marriage expenses. Therefore, the respondent is liable to return all such articles and expenses to the appellant.
4. After framing issues and recording evidence of both parties, the Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-12-2025 15:57:07 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:62571 3 FA-421-2010 learned Family Court came to the conclusion that the appellant had failed to prove the allegations of insanity and impotency on the part of the respondent. Accordingly, dismissed the suit filed under Section 12 of the Act for declaring her marriage with respondent on 29.04.2004 as null and void and for stridhan and marriage expenses. Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellant has preferred the instant first appeal.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the learned Trial Court erred in not considering the testimony of Commissioner Witness Dr. Pali Rastogi, who, at pages 2 and 3 of his statement dated 12.02.2010, clearly stated that the respondent had not undergone the requisite medical tests necessary to determine impotence, and had consented only to the examination of semen count. It is further submitted that the Trial Court overlooked the respondent's admissions in his cross- examination, particularly in paragraphs 18, 19, and 20, wherein he acknowledged lacking sexual desire and never made an attempt to engage in marital relations with the appellant since the marriage.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the Trial Court failed to appreciate the statements of the prosecution witnesses, which unequivocally established that the respondent is of unsound mind. Despite such evidence, the petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed. In view of above submissions, it is urged that the impugned judgment is arbitrary, unjust, and contrary to the settled principles of matrimonial law, and is therefore liable to be set aside.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent opposes the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant and submits Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-12-2025 15:57:07 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:62571 4 FA-421-2010 that the appellant has made vague and unsubstantiated allegations regarding the mental health of the respondent. He supported the impugned judgment passed by the trial Court and submitted that the learned trial Court after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, statements of witnesses and the evidence adduced before it, has passed the judgment. The appellant has falsely made allegation of insanity on the respondent and she herself voluntarily deserted the respondent. It is also submitted that no document or medical evidence had been adduced before the trial Court to establish that the respondent is impotent or he has been suffering from mental illness. It is submitted that only to get rid of from the respondent, the appellant made a false story and made false allegation on the respondent. The appellant left the matrimonial home only after two days voluntarily. Therefore, the learned Family Court rightly dismissed the appellant's application, and no interference is warranted in the impugned judgment and decree passed by the trial Court.
8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival submissions made herein-above and also went through the records with utmost circumspection.
9. A perusal of the impugned order would go to show that the learned trial Court has rejected the application filed under Section 12 of the Act of 1955, on the premise that the appellant has failed to substantiate her allegations through cogent and legally admissible evidence. From the material available on record, it is evident that the appellant-wife has alleged that the respondent-husband was suffering from a serious mental Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-12-2025 15:57:07 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:62571 5 FA-421-2010 illness, even prior to the marriage, and that the same was knowingly concealed by the respondent and his family members. However, a perusal of the record shows that except a medical prescription, no substantive or expert medical evidence has been adduced to establish the mental condition of the respondent-husband either before or after the marriage. No expert opinion was brought on record to establish that the respondent had been suffering from mental illness since birth or at the time of marriage, which is essential to attract the provisions of Section 12(1)(b) or 12(1)(c) of the Act of 1955. From the material available on record, it is evident that the learned counsel for the appellant had cross- examined the respondent-husband at considerable length. The cross- examination runs into seven pages, and the respondent-husband has furnished answers to all questions put to him by the appellant's counsel. It is difficult to accept that a person allegedly suffering from mental illness would be able to respond with such clarity and consistency to an extensive cross-examination. Furthermore, although the appellant-wife has made specific allegations regarding the respondent-husband's mental illness, she has failed to substantiate those claims with reliable and admissible evidence.
10. In matrimonial proceedings seeking annulment of marriage on the ground of mental incapacity, it is incumbent upon the petitioner to establish, through clear and convincing evidence, that the respondent was suffering from a mental disorder of such a nature or to such an extent as to be unfit for marriage and procreation of children. In the absence of Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-12-2025 15:57:07 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:62571 6 FA-421-2010 any medical expert's testimony, and without any clinical diagnosis confirmed by competent witnesses, such a serious ground cannot be accepted as proved.
11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sm. Anima Roy v. Probodh Mohan Roy (1968 SCC OnLine Cal 89) held that in proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act, where mental illness is pleaded as a ground for divorce or annulment, it is essential to establish that the mental disorder is of such a kind and extent that it is not only incurable, but also renders the spouse unfit for marital obligations. In the absence of medical expert testimony and without examination of treating doctors, the Court cannot draw such conclusions merely based on assumptions or prescriptions. The Supreme Court further emphasized that the burden of proof rests heavily upon the party seeking annulment or divorce on such a ground, and that the standard of proof in such matters is higher, given the consequences attached to severing a marital tie.
12. The law is now well settled that in proceedings under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 the burden lies heavily on the appellant to prove the foundational facts justifying annulment of marriage. The mere filing of prescriptions or absence of rebuttal by the respondent does not absolve the appellant from discharging the burden of proof through cogent and trustworthy evidence. (see: X v. Y, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1654).
13. Apart from filing certain prescriptions, the appellant did not examine any of the treating doctors to prove that the respondent was Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-12-2025 15:57:07 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:62571 7 FA-421-2010 suffering from such mental disorder at the time of marriage. The documents filed remain unproven and cannot be treated as substantive evidence in absence of medical expert testimony.
14. The appellant is seeking recovery of Rs. 81,400/- towards marriage expenses, along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. However, Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act does not provide for the reimbursement of marriage expenses. The joint property of the spouses, including gifts and jewellery given to the woman, is vested in the woman. Appellant failed to prove that the respondent or his family retained these gifts and did not return the same. Since the appellant has failed to establish that she got stridhan worth Rs. 63,000/-, the question of returning the same does not arise.
15. In Hinduism, purpose of marriage is to create a sacred union that allows individual to fulfil their duties described in Hindu law. Duties in Hindu law which a person has to strive for is "Dharma, Artha, Kama and Moksh". By doing marriage, couple has to produce offspring (progeny) and also Kama which means ritual arising from marriage which is sacred and provides for physical and emotional intimacy, love and fulfilment of desires. Marriage is a sacred rite and ritual in Hindu law which provides for socially and legally approved means for physical and sexual union ensuring mental and physical satisfaction of couples' desires.
16. The Satapatha Brahmana V.2.1.10 says :-
'The wife is indeed half of one's self; therefore as long as a man does not secure a wife so long he does not beget a son and so he is till then not Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-12-2025 15:57:07 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:62571 8 FA-421-2010 complete (or whole); but when he secures a wife he gets progeny and then he becomes complete.' There are four purposes in Hindu marriages;
1. Progeny (praja)
2. Sexual pleasure (rati)
3. Happiness (anandam)
4. Companionship in the performance of Dharma (sahatvam or dharmasampatti).
17. As per aforesaid, very purpose of marriage between two Hindus is to achieve aforesaid purpose and duties. If marriage is not consummated between two persons then very purpose of marriage between two persons will fail. In Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, marriage can be declared void, if marriage has not been consummated owing to impotence of other party. In this case, appellant failed to prove impotency but both parties had admitted that their marriage has not been consummated.
18. The parties did not consummate the marriage and they are living separately since 2004 i.e. about 21 years. Non-consummation of marriage due to fault of one party will amount to cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 towards other party.
19. Decree for declaring marriage to be void cannot be granted to appellant despite the fact that there is admission by the parties that there is non-consummation of marriage because fact of impotency has not been proved. Grant of such decree will amount to overstep legislative intent under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Appellant has not prayed for any other relief i.e. for dissolution of marriage.
Signature Not Verified Signed by: SHABANA ANSARI Signing time: 19-12-2025 15:57:07NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-JBP:62571 9 FA-421-2010
20. Can Court grant such relief to appellant without there being any prayer for dissolution of marriage.
21. Section 23 lays down that if any ground exists for grant of relief except in cases under Section 5(a) or (b) or (c) and in cases where person asking relief is not taking advantage of his own mistake then such relief can be granted by Court. In this case, appellant at the time of filing of appeal was a young woman aged about 25 years and she must be around 45 of years of age at this point of time. Non-consummation of marriage between appellant and respondent will amount to cruelty to appellant if appellant is not permitted to lead a free life where she has option to choose her own partner or not to choose any other partner in life.
22. In these circumstances, first appeal is disposed of dissolving marriage between the appellant and respondent dated 29.04.2004 under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
23. Decree be drawn accordingly.
(VISHAL DHAGAT) (B. P. SHARMA)
JUDGE JUDGE
SM/$A
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SHABANA
ANSARI
Signing time: 19-12-2025
15:57:07