According to a state high court in India, a woman's fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution would be violated if she were made to undergo a virginity test. According to the chhattisgarh high court, granting such authorization would go against natural justice principles.
In response to a criminal petition filed by a man who claimed his wife was having an extramarital affair with another man and sought her virginity test, a family court order dated october 15, 2024, which denied the interim plea, Justice Arvind Kumar Verma issued his decision.
However, the woman refused to live with her husband, claiming he was impotent.
Instead, the HC recommended that the petitioner do the relevant medical test or provide any other proof to demonstrate the unfoundedness of the impotence accusations.
"He cannot possibly be permitted to subject the wife to undergo her virginity test and fill up the lacuna in his evidence".
The decree was passed in January, but it was only just made public; it should be mentioned.
According to the high court, the petitioner's argument that his wife must undergo a virginity test is unlawful since it goes against Article 21 of the Constitution, which protects women's dignity.
"The right to live with dignity, which is essential for women, is guaranteed by Article 21 of the indian Constitution in addition to the rights to life and personal liberty.
"A woman cannot be made to perform a virginity test against her will. The fundamental rights protected by Article 21 are being violated. "The 'heart of fundamental rights' is Article 21," the high court concluded.
Justice Verma further said that the virginity test is a violation of the basic right of women to be treated with decency and proper dignity.
"The right to individual freedom guaranteed by Article 21 is unalienable and cannot be altered in any way. To fill in the gaps in his evidence, the petitioner cannot possibly be allowed to have his wife undergo a virginity test.
"Be that as it may, but in any case, granting the permission for virginity test of the respondent would be against her fundamental rights, the cardinal principles of natural justice and secret modesty of a female," the court stated.
Human rights that cannot be altered, even during emergencies or times of war, are known as non-derogable rights.
The bench further noted that the accusations made by each party against the other are the focus of evidence, and that only after evidence has been presented can a conclusion be established.
"The high court is of the considered opinion that the order impugned is neither illegal nor perverse and there is no judicial error committed by the trial court," it stated.
According to Hindu customs, the couple was married on april 30, 2023. They shared a home in the korba district at the husband's family home.
According to the petitioner's attorney, the wife allegedly told her relatives that her husband was impotent and that she would not be married or live with him.
On July 2, 2024, she petitioned the Raigarh district family court under section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for an interim maintenance payment of Rs 20,000 from her husband.
The petitioner requested a virginity test of his wife in response to the maintenance claim interim application, claiming that she was having an extramarital affair with her brother-in-law. The marriage was never consummated, he said.
The spouse filed a criminal petition in the high court after his request was denied by the Raigarh family court on october 15, 2024.
In the family court, the case is presently at the evidence stage.
In response to a criminal petition filed by a man who claimed his wife was having an extramarital affair with another man and sought her virginity test, a family court order dated october 15, 2024, which denied the interim plea, Justice Arvind Kumar Verma issued his decision.
However, the woman refused to live with her husband, claiming he was impotent.
Instead, the HC recommended that the petitioner do the relevant medical test or provide any other proof to demonstrate the unfoundedness of the impotence accusations.
"He cannot possibly be permitted to subject the wife to undergo her virginity test and fill up the lacuna in his evidence".
The decree was passed in January, but it was only just made public; it should be mentioned.
According to the high court, the petitioner's argument that his wife must undergo a virginity test is unlawful since it goes against Article 21 of the Constitution, which protects women's dignity.
"The right to live with dignity, which is essential for women, is guaranteed by Article 21 of the indian Constitution in addition to the rights to life and personal liberty.
"A woman cannot be made to perform a virginity test against her will. The fundamental rights protected by Article 21 are being violated. "The 'heart of fundamental rights' is Article 21," the high court concluded.
Justice Verma further said that the virginity test is a violation of the basic right of women to be treated with decency and proper dignity.
"The right to individual freedom guaranteed by Article 21 is unalienable and cannot be altered in any way. To fill in the gaps in his evidence, the petitioner cannot possibly be allowed to have his wife undergo a virginity test.
"Be that as it may, but in any case, granting the permission for virginity test of the respondent would be against her fundamental rights, the cardinal principles of natural justice and secret modesty of a female," the court stated.
Human rights that cannot be altered, even during emergencies or times of war, are known as non-derogable rights.
The bench further noted that the accusations made by each party against the other are the focus of evidence, and that only after evidence has been presented can a conclusion be established.
"The high court is of the considered opinion that the order impugned is neither illegal nor perverse and there is no judicial error committed by the trial court," it stated.
According to Hindu customs, the couple was married on april 30, 2023. They shared a home in the korba district at the husband's family home.
According to the petitioner's attorney, the wife allegedly told her relatives that her husband was impotent and that she would not be married or live with him.
On July 2, 2024, she petitioned the Raigarh district family court under section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) for an interim maintenance payment of Rs 20,000 from her husband.
The petitioner requested a virginity test of his wife in response to the maintenance claim interim application, claiming that she was having an extramarital affair with her brother-in-law. The marriage was never consummated, he said.
The spouse filed a criminal petition in the high court after his request was denied by the Raigarh family court on october 15, 2024.
In the family court, the case is presently at the evidence stage.
click and follow Indiaherald WhatsApp channel