The Karnataka High Court imposes a cost of Rs.50000/- on the husband on his application to refer the wife to a Board of Psychiatrist for Medical Examination.

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed a Petition under Article 227 of the constitution of India filed by the husband against the order of the family court which kept the application filed by the husband in abeyance. The husband had filed an application before the family court, Bangalore, praying for referring his estranged wife to a Board of Psychiatrist for Medical Examination.
 
The husband, who is the petitioner before the High Court, and his wife who is the respondent no. 1 were married in the year 2020, however several grievances and disputes arose between the two and the wife allegedly moved to her parent’s house. Subsequently the wife filed a complaint before the local police under section 498A of the IPC r/w section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The police conducted the investigation and filed a charge sheet in the matter. That after the wife filed the complaint against the husband, the petitioner husband filed a petition seeking annulment of marriage on the ground of cruelty. Now in the said petition for annulment of marriage the husband moves an application to refer the wife to a Board of Psychiatrist at NIMHANS for medical examination. The wife filed her objections to the said application thereby appending several documents to demonstrate that she was not of an unsound mind. The husband’s application was not considered by the family court favourable and hence he filed the present petition under article 227 before the High Court.
 
The High Court observed thus:

In the light of the judgment of the Apex Court and the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, no fault can be found with the order passed by the concerned court. It is rather unfortunate that by seeking annulment of marriage, the husband has tried to project the wife being of unsound mind, her intelligence at the age of 11 years and 8 months and seeks to contend that the marriage itself is void and a fraud is being played by the respondents on the petitioner on the score that if the mental age of the wife is not that of 18 years of age, the marriage is void. Such submissions are noted only to be rejected, as the husband has not preferred a petition before the concerned court invoking mental unsoundness of the wife, but it is on cruelty.    

ABC AND XYZ