Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The Petitioner's suspicion was thus confirmed when he himself with great persuasion examined the Respondent he was struck to find that there was malformation and structural defect in the genital organ and it was practically impossible to have any sexual intercourse with the Respondent."

That this is a falsehood is clear from the Appellant's version in his examination-in-chief, where he says:-

"I therefore concluded that either she did not have desire to have sexual intercourse with me. However, I did not physically examine her to determine whether she had vagina or not."