Divorce given after husband refuses sex over job ‘lie’ | delhi | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Dec 04, 2016-Sunday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

Divorce given after husband refuses sex over job ‘lie’

delhi Updated: Apr 01, 2012 01:19 IST
Harish V Nair
Harish V Nair
Hindustan Times
Highlight Story

Delhi high court in a unique divorce ruling has allowed a woman to end her marriage because her husband refused to have physical relations on the ground that she did not have a job as mentioned in her biodata before they tied the knot.


The court maintained that the “denial of sexual relationship to a spouse amounts to cruelty” and accused the husband of being “insensitive and harsh”. The couple had spent only a month together after their wedding.

In the court, the husband accused his wife of duping him by claiming to be a working woman in her response to his matrimonial ad. He refused to have sex till she produced proof of her employment and educational certificates.

Justice Kailash Gambhir dismissed the husband’s petition challenging a trial court order allowing the wife to dissolve the marriage, saying, “Undeniably, with the ever-increasing cost of living, to lead a comfortable life, one looks for a working spouse and to this extent, this court does not find any fault with the expectation of the husband.”

But he added, “It is inexplicable, however, that the husband gave so much importance to the employment of his wife that he put a precondition for production of the testimonials of employment first and then to consummate the marriage.”

The court was critical of the husband for treating marriage as “barter system”. Justice Gambhir opined that the husband should have waited for the woman to settle down and then take up the topic of employment with her.

“To put a pre-condition (of a job) for discharging one of the most vital matrimonial obligations (physical relationship) is baffling and unfathomable to say the least,” Justice Gambhir added.

The court found no merit in the husband's argument that he had only wanted her to furnish requisite certificates so as to enable him to look for a job for her and that he wanted that they should not have any child till they were financially secure.