A matrimonial court's power to order a medical examination of a spouse under the Hindu Marriage Act must be exercised based on prima facie material and a reasoned order, rather than mechanically, to avoid abuse of discretionary power.

##PAGE1##

2026:BHC-AUG:15923

(1) wp-12217-2025.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO.12217 OF 2025

D W/o N S ,

,

Tal- Sakri, Dist. Dhule. ..Petitioner

(Original Respondent)

Versus

N s/o N S

Nardana, Tal. Shindekheda, Dist. Dhule. ..Respondent

(Original Petitioner)

…

Ms. Rutuja L. Jakhande, Advocate for Petitioner.

Mr. H. V. Tungar, Advocate for Respondent.

…

CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.

DATED : 15th APRIL, 2026.

JUDGMENT:-

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of

parties, matter is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage.

2. The present Writ Petition takes exception to order dated

02.08.2025 passed below Exhibit-16 by learned Civil Judge Senior

Division, Dhule in HMP No.314/2024, whereby application filed by

respondent for examination of petitioner through expert

psychiatrist has been allowed.

3. The respondent instituted proceeding under Section 13 (1)

(ia)(ib) and (iii) (a) & (b) of Hindu Marriage Act seeking decree of

(2) wp-12217-2025.odt

divorce on ground that petitioner-wife is incurably of unsound

mind or suffering from mental disorder. The petitioner filed

written statement and denied averment in petition and took plea

that she is mentally sound and not suffering from any mental

illness or disorder in terms of sub-clause (iii) of sub-section (1) of

Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act. Eventually, respondent filed

application below Exhibit-16 seeking direction to refer petitioner

for medical examination to find out her mental and physical status,

particularly in light of pleading in petition. The Trial Court after

considering rival submissions, allowed application and directed

petitioner to remain present for medical examination before expert

psychiatrist in Civil Hospital, Dhule and call confidential report of

examination.

4. Ms. Rutuja Jakhande, learned Advocate appearing for

petitioner submits that Trial Court has mechanically passed order

for medical examination of petitioner through expert psychiatrist.

There is no material to prima facie indicate that petitioner ever

suffered psychological disorder or unsoundness of mind. Except for

bare assertions of petitioner, there is nothing on record to indicate

that expert opinion is necessary as to her psychological or mental

condition. In support of her contentions she relies upon

observations of Karnataka High Court at Bengaluru in case of Sri.

(3) wp-12217-2025.odt

Jaganath A. S. Vs. Smt. Madhushree D. S. (Writ Petition

No.26295/2023 decided on 12.03.2024).

5. Per contra, Mr. Tungar, learned Advocate appearing for

respondent submits that Court is empowered to call for report of

medical examination to satisfy as to existence of grounds as

contemplated under Section 13(1)(iii) of Hindu Marriage Act. The

respondent-husband took specific plea in petition about physical

and mental condition of petitioner-wife. To bring truth on record,

medical examination is necessary. In support of his contentions he

relies upon observations of this Court in case of Sushma w/o

Umesh Kanpathak Vs. Umesh s/o Vijayrao Kanpathak, 2018(1) Mh.L.J. 51. and

observations of Supreme Court in case of Sharda Vs. Dharmpal , 2003 (3) SCR 105.

6. Having considered submissions advanced by learned

Advocates appearing for respective parties and on perusal of

material placed into service, it can be observed that respondent-

husband took plea that petitioner’s behaviour was abnormal. She

was never ready