Physical Diseases as Grounds for Divorce in Indian Laws

Matrimonial Indian laws hold firm views on considering physical diseases as valid grounds for divorce. After all, it is not practical to consider every physical ailment as a ground for the dissolution of a marriage. For the same reason, Indian laws on divorce entitle either parties to file for matrimonial relief only in case the spouse is suffering from leprosy or a venereal disease.

Indian Laws: Statutory Provisions

Here are the various Indian Laws that pertain to matrimonial reliefs on the ground of physical disease:

In the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 13(iv) and (v) (amended in 1976) ‘virulent and incurable form or leprosy’ and venereal disease in a communicable form are sufficient to file for divorce.

In section 27(f) and (g) of the Special Marriage Act Section, the same provisions as that of the HMA have been adopted, except that the disease does not necessarily have to be ‘virulent or incurable.’

Under the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act of 1936, leprosy is not mentioned but if the plaintiff has got infected with a venereal disease from the defendant, the former can seek matrimonial relief within two years of infection.

Under the Indian Divorce Act 1869, sections 10(1)(iv) and (v) (amended in 2001 by Act 51) hold the same view as HMA. However, it has a slight difference that the defendant should have been suffering from the disease for a minimum of two years.

Indian Laws: Case Study

Sometimes Indian laws have undergone amendments which could have helped couples gain matrimonial relief if the amendment had taken place earlier, as in the case, Madhusudan v Chandrika AIR 1975 MP 174.

In this case, the husband demanded divorce saying that wife had been suffering from a ‘venereal disease’ for the past two years. His plea was, however, rejected because he could not prove that the wife was suffering from ‘venereal disease’ in a communicable form’ for a minimum of three years when the petition was filed. If this case had been filed after the 1976 Amendment, the husband would have been granted the decree as the three year requirement was removed by then.