IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPEALEATE SIDE

WRIT PETITION (CL.) NO. 12 /2018
(Filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India)

IN THE MATTER OF:

IN THE MATTER OF ARTICLE 21 & 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

Mrs. Gulab )……Petitioner

Versus

Ramnarayan )……Respondent

1
Sr. No TOPIC NAME PAGE NO.

1 Cover Page
2 Table of Contents
3 Index of Authorities
5 Statement of Jurisdiction
6 Statement of Facts
7 Issues Raised
8 Summary of Arguments
9 Arguments Advanced
10 Prayer

2
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
Statues referred:
1. The Indian Penal Code, 1860
2. Indian Evidence Act, 1872
3. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
4. Article 21 in The Constitution of India 1949
5. Section 9 in The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
6. Section 19 in The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
7. Article 14 in The Constitution of India 1949
8. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Case law:
1. T. Sareetha vs T. Venkata Subbaiah on 1 July, 1983
2. Ajay Jawaharlal Kakaria vs Sandhya Ajay Kakaria on 21 August, 1992
3. Abdul Azeem vs Fahimunnisa Begum on 18 January, 1967
4. Debashis Chakraborty vs Smt. Mausumi Bhattacharjee on 1 August, 2007

Website:
1. www.legalservice.india.com
2. https://indiankanoon.org/

3
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

This Hon’ble High Court of Bombay has the jurisdiction to try, entertain and dispose of
the present case by virtue of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950.
The Respondent humbly submits this memorandum in response to the appeal filed
before this Hon’ble Court. The Appeal invokes its jurisdiction under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India, 1950.

4
 Statement of Facts

 Marriage of Gulab was solemnized with Ramnarayan on 01/10/2017. It was an

Arranged Marriage. After marriage Gulab stayed at her matrimonial house with
Ramnarayan for a few days and left for her parental home.
 In November 2017 Gulab filed a Marriage Petition No. 125/2017 before Family
Court, Bandra under Section 12 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for seeking a decree of
annulment of marriage. The Only ground raised in the said petition that Ramnarayan
was an impotent and due to his impotency the said marriage has not been
consummated.
 The Respondent filed his written statement on 2nd December 2017 opposing the
petition. The Respondent Ramnarayan denied the allegation and contended that he
was not an impotent.
 During pendency of the said proceedings the Respondent Ramnarayan filed an
Application dated 20th December 2017 for medical examination of the Petitioner to
prove that she was not a virgin.
 The Petitioner opposed the application; however, the family court allowed the
application by an Order dated 25th December 2017 and directed the Petitioner to
undergo medical examination. The Trial Court was of the opinion that all steps can be
taken for finding out the truth.
 The Petitioner Gulab challenged the said Order of Family Court, before High Court,
Bombay and preferred a Civil Writ Petition No. 12/2018 under article 227 of the
Constitution of India. The Petitioner contended that the impugned Order has
interfered with her Right to Privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

 The husband-Respondent appeared before Hon’ble High Court and by his reply
opposed Petition on the ground that it was the only method of proving whether the
marriage was consummated or not.

 The Petition is posted for arguments on 20th January 2018.

5
 ISSUES RAISED

1. Gulab filed a Marriage Petition No. 125/2017 before Family Court, Bandra under
Section 12 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for seeking a decree of annulment of
marriage. The Only ground raised in the said petition that Ramnarayan was an
impotent and due to his impotency the said marriage has not been consummated

2. Whether impugned Order for medical examination of the Petitioner to prove that she
was not a virgin has interfered with her Right to Privacy under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India.

6
 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

1. Gulab filed a Marriage Petition No. 125/2017 before Family Court, Bandra
under Section 12 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for seeking a decree of annulment
of marriage. The Only ground raised in the said petition that Ramnarayan was
an impotent and due to his impotency the said marriage has not been
consummated
It is humbly submitted to this Hon’ble Court that allegation laid before the Family
Court under Section 12 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

2. Whether impugned Order has interfered with her Right to Privacy under Article
21 of the Constitution of India.
It is humbly submitted to this Hon’ble Court that in the given facts the only method of
proving whether the marriage was consummated or not was by checking her virginity,
If Gulab was a virgin it will suffice that marriage is not consummated.

7
 ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

1. Gulab filed a Marriage Petition No. 125/2017 before Family Court, Bandra
under Section 12 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for seeking a decree of annulment
of marriage. The Only ground raised in the said petition that Ramnarayan was
an impotent and due to his impotency the said marriage has not been
consummated
It is most respectfully being submitted before the Hon’ble Court that allegation laid
before the Family Court that ground raised in the said petition that Respondent was an
impotent and due to his impotency the said marriage has not been consummated was
false and no supportive evidence was laid before the Court.
As Petitioner have no valid evidence for the same, so the allegation of petitioner is not
valid and hence it is prayed that the decree of annulment of marriage shall not be
granted.

3. Whether impugned Order has interfered with her Right to Privacy under Article
21 of the Constitution of India.
It is most respectfully being submitted before the Hon’ble Court that in the given facts
the only method of proving whether the marriage was consummated or not was by
checking her virginity, If Gulab was a virgin it will suffice that marriage is not
consummated.