Spouse Suffering From Epilepsy Not Ground For Divorce Under Hindu Marriage Act, It's Not A Mental Disorder: Bombay High Court

Spouse suffering from epilepsy cannot be ground for divorce under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, the Bombay High Court observed and upheld a family court order refusing divorce to a man.

A division bench at Nagpur comprising Justices Vinay Joshi and Valmiki Menezes observed,

"…the condition of “epilepsy” is neither an incurable disease nor can it be considered a mental disorder or a psychopathic disorder, for making a ground under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act."

The court further said medical evidence doesn’t support the husband’s stand that epilepsy would be an impediment to the spouses living together.

The bench relied on the 1976 landmark judgment of Raghunath Gopal Daftardar vs Sau, Vijaya Raghunath Daftardar wherein the Bombay High Court refused a man nullity of marriage on the ground that his wife did not disclose she suffered from epilepsy.

Facts

The petitioner/ husband approached the family court for divorce in 2013. His petition was dismissed in 2016 after which he approached the High Court. The wife’s plea for restitution of conjugal rights was allowed.

The husband filed the petition seeking divorce under Section 13(1)(i-a) and under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

He claimed that his wife had threatened him to commit suicide and her behavior was abnormal, leading to a breakdown in their marriage due to mental torture and cruelty. He said his wife was suffering from fits of epilepsy which was an incurable disease leading to her being of unsound mind. He further claimed the mental disorder was of a kind that he could not be expected to live with.

The wife denied allegations made by her husband. She claimed to have been driven out of the home and sought maintenance for herself and her daughter. She claimed she was under treatment of a Neurologist since she lost consciousness twice, which was diagnosed as being a seizure, which was not an incurable mental disorder or disability that would incapacitate her.

The husband examined the wife’s doctor as his witness. Based on the deposition, the court noted that two facts were clear, first that the women only suffered from a brain seizure and not from epilepsy. And the second that epilepsy itself is a medical condition in which a person suffering from it can lead a normal life.

“Thus clearly, even assuming the respondent was suffering from epilepsy, this was certainly not a mental disorder or a psychopathic disorder or for that matter can be even considered as leaving the respondent incurably of unsound mind.”

The court noted that it was after Raghunath Gopal Daftardar (supra) judgement that the provisions of Section 13(1)(iii) were amended w.e.f. 27.05.1976, allowing for claiming of decree of dissolution of marriage on grounds of unsoundness of mind or mental disorder.

It however applied the same judgement to deny divorce to the man, refusing to interfere with the judgement of the family court.

“We hold that the petitioner has failed to prove that the respondent was suffering from epilepsy or even that, if she were suffering from such a condition, the same could be considered as a ground under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Act for claiming a decree of dissolution of marriage.”