Virginity Test Violates Wife’s Privacy; Refusal Of Sex By Itself Not A Ground Of Divorce: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Seeking medical exam nothing but virginity test, recent judicial trends strongly disapprove it
Justice Vivek Jain, Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has refused to direct medical examination of a wife in a matrimonial dispute, holding that such a course would amount to an impermissible intrusion into her dignity and privacy, particularly when the divorce petition is founded on allegations of cruelty.
The bench even remarked that a medical examination to determine whether the wife has engaged in sexual relations is effectively a virginity test, and recent judicial trends show strong disapproval of conducting such tests on women.
A single-judge bench of Justice Vivek Jain opined, “…the plea made by the petitioner/husband to subject the respondent/wife to medical examination as the said examination would be nothing but a virginity test which would be an invasion of privacy of the individual and is not relevant for the purpose of divorce as refusal to enter into sexual intercourse in itself is not a ground of divorce and the petitioner can adduce other evidence to prove disinclination of the wife to enter into sexual relations, as alleged in the divorce petition and virginity test or “two-finger test” of the wife would neither be relevant nor be conclusive for the purposes of the divorce petition. It would be nothing but invasion of privacy”.
Advocate Mohd. Aadil Usman appeared for the petitioner.
The Court was hearing a petition filed by a husband challenging a Family Court order which had rejected his application seeking medical examination of his wife in a divorce proceeding under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (the Act).
The husband had sought the medical examination to the extent that whether the respondent/wife has ever had sexual relations with anybody or whether she has been subjected to anal intercourse. The wife, had denied allegations while counter-alleging dowry harassment, physical and mental cruelty, and sodomy.
Rejecting the husband’s plea, the High Court noted that refusal to engage in sexual relations is not an independent ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act and that such issues, at best, may be assessed through evidence led during trial.
The Court further observed that allegations relating to sexual conduct cannot justify compelling a woman to undergo medical tests, especially when such tests are unlikely to conclusively establish the claims made.
The Court also observed that the relief sought was, in substance, an attempt to determine the wife’s sexual past, which is neither legally permissible nor medically determinative.
Reaffirming constitutional protections of bodily autonomy, dignity and privacy, the Court held that such medical examinations cannot be ordered as a matter of course in matrimonial disputes.
Accordingly, the High Court upheld the Family Court’s order and dismissed the husband’s petition, clarifying that the parties must establish their respective cases through legally admissible evidence during trial.
Cause Title: A v. C [Neutral Citation No. 2026:MPHC-JBP:7081]
Appearances:
Petitioner: Mohd. Aadil Usman, Advocate