Bombay High Court Invalidates Marriage Due to Husband’s “Relative Impotency

The court said there could be various physical and mental causes for such relative impotency. A division bench of justices Vibha Kankanwadi and S G Chapalgaonkar delivered the judgment on April 15.

They noted that this was a fit case to help “young sufferers of marriage” who could not connect with each other mentally, emotionally or physically. The case involved a 27-year-old man who approached the bench after a family court refused an application filed by his 26-year-old wife seeking to annul the marriage on the admission stage itself.

The high court emphasized that the expression ‘relative impotency’ is distinct from normal impotency, referring to the inability to copulate in general. Relative impotency involves a situation where a person might be capable of having intercourse but incapable of performing it with the spouse.

The court determined that the husband had relative impotency towards the wife, leading to non-consummation of the marriage. The man initially blamed his wife for this situation but later admitted his relative impotency to the court.

The couple got married in March 2023 but separated after 17 days, citing non-consummation of the marriage. The woman claimed the man had declined physical relations with her and they couldn’t connect mentally, emotionally, or physically.

The man initially avoided admitting relative impotency, but later submitted a written statement acknowledging it, emphasizing that he did not want any stigma of being impotent in general. The family court rejected the wife’s application to decide the divorce plea at the admission stage itself.

However, the HC bench overturned this decision and annulled the marriage, declaring it null and void.