Bombay HC: Necessary To Disclose Incurable Disease Before Marriage

The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court ruled that granting divorce is right if a partner doesn't disclose their incurable disease before marriage. The court made this judgement while allowing divorce to a man in Akola who blamed his wife and her parents for hiding that she was suffering from a disease named congenital ptosis. Read on to learn more about the proceeding. 

As per the reports, the couple got married on May 18, 2017, in Akola. But within three months, the couple started living separately. The man claimed that his wife was suffering from congenital ptosis in which her left always remained open, even while she was sleeping. He filed for annulment of marriage on the grounds of cruelty while the wife filed proceedings for restitution of conjugal rights. 

Why did the court allow the man to divorce his wife?

However, the high court upheld the divorce sought by the man. A division bench comprising justices Vinay Joshi and Mahendra Chandwani said, "If a girl or a boy, who is of a marriageable age, suffers from an incurable disease before the solemnization of marriage and knows about it, it’s necessary to disclose this to the party, who approaches them with a marriage proposal." 

Pulling up the wife and her parents, the court added, "The woman and her parents were aware before marriage she suffered from ptosis and post-operational deformity (nocturnal lagophthalmos). It was obligatory for them to inform the would-be husband before marriage. Had this fact been disclosed, it would
have led him to refuse consent to marriage."

Important to disclose incurable diseases before marriage: Court

The court said that although the permanent deformity in the eyelid muscle of the woman would not necessarily affect the happy marital life or even the sexual relationship, it cannot be ignored that if the husband knew about the deformity, he might not have given his consent for marriage.

It would be a different case if the incurable disease is contracted after marriage. But in this case, there is no reconciliation, the court added, "rather, the husband has come up with a case of non-consummation of marriage. Merely staying at the husband’s house for more than a week after he got knowledge of the disease, does not amount to condoning non-disclosure of facts."