Court cannot compel spouse's medical examination in matrimonial proceedings without prima facie proof of mental unsoundness.

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.04.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN and C.M.P.(MD)No.5193 of 2026 XXXXX ... Petitioner vs.

YYYYY ... Respondent PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the fair and decreetal order made in I.A.No.3 of 2025 in H.M.O.P.No.1145 of 2023, dated 08.10.2025 on the file of the Family Court, Madurai, by allowing this Civil Revision Petition.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.R.Subramanian

O R D E R

Heard Mr.T.R.Subramanian for the Civil Revision Petitioner.

2. The civil revision petitioner is the husband and the respondent is his wife.

3. The husband's attempt to send his wife for a medical examination to the Government Rajaji Hospital Medical Board, Madurai, was rejected by the Family Court, Madurai. Hence, this revision.

4. There is no dispute in the relationship between the parties.

The petitioner husband married the respondent wife on 31.08.2022. Alleging that certain facts had been suppressed at the time of marriage and also that, he had been treated with mental cruelty, he presented H.M.O.P.No.1145 of 2023. The petition has been filed invoking Sections 11, 12(b) and 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Summons has been served on the wife. She has also presented her counter. Thereafter, the parties were pushed to trial.

5. During the course of trial, the husband examined a Doctor, who is said to have treated the wife, allegedly for Schizophrenia. After this evidence was completed, the husband took the present application in I.A.No.3 of 2025, seeking a direction from the Family Court to direct the wife to present herself before the Medical Board at the Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai for assessment. This application was dismissed. Hence, the revision.

6. I heard Mr.T.R.Subramaniam for the Civil Revision petitioner. 7. Mr.T.R.Subramaniam submits that he has substantiated his case by examining P.W.2, the doctor who had treated his wife. He further states that, by way of additional evidence, the husband seeks a direction for the wife to undergo a medical examination. He states that prima facie he has been able to demonstrate before the Court that the wife is suffering from Schizophrenia and therefore, the Family Court erred in dismissing the petition.

8. I have considered the submissions of Mr.Subramanian and I have gone through the records.

9. At the outset, I shoud point out that when H.M.O.P.No.1145 of 2023 was presented, the wife was not shown as a mentally challenged person. In a proceeding, where the respondent is alleged to be mentally unstable or mentally challenged, a guardian ought to be appointed for such person, and only thereafter the proceedings can be taken up further. A perusal of the cause title shows that the wife has been arrayed in her normal capacity. Further, if the wife is stated to be suffering from mental illness, I have my own doubts as to how the petitioner can maintain an application under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The petition has not been filed under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Act. The allegation of the husband is that the wife is not mentally sane. When a person is not mentally sane, he or she cannot be held responsible for the actions taken by him or her. If that be the situation, the ground of mental cruelty falls flat on its face. This is only a prima facie conclusion in order to point out the huge void in the case of the husband.

10. Apart from this, the husband has examined a doctor, who allegedly treated the wife. It is for the husband to demonstrate before the Court that, on account of such a treatment, the wife was incapable of discharging her matrimonial duties.