S.12(1)(b) HMA | Mental Illness Of Spouse To Be Proved By Doctor, Mere Prescriptions Insufficient To Seek Annulment: Chhattisgarh High Court

The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that for seeking annulment of marriage under Section 12(1)(b)  Hindu Marriage Act on the ground of mental illness/disorder of spouse, sufficient evidence has to be led in the form of medical experts' testimony and reports of clinical diagnosis if any.

It thus said that mere filing of medical prescriptions is insufficient for proving mental illness of spouse.

Upholding the dismissal of marriage annulment plea made by a husband, the Division Bench of Justice Rajani Dubey and Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad held –

“In matrimonial proceedings seeking annulment of marriage on the ground of mental incapacity, it is incumbent upon the petitioner to establish, through clear and convincing evidence, that the respondent was suffering from a mental disorder of such a nature or to such an extent as to be unfit for marriage and procreation of children. In the absence of any medical expert's testimony, and without any clinical diagnosis confirmed by competent witnesses, such a serious ground cannot be accepted as proved.”

The marriage between appellant-husband and respondent-wife was solemnised on March 03, 2008, out of which wedlock two daughters were born. The appellant alleged that the family members of the respondent represented her as a physically and mentally normal person, but subsequent to the marriage, he noticed abnormal behaviour, such as shouting, damaging household items, using abusive language, and beating the children without reason.

He got her medically examined, which revealed that she was suffering from a severe mental illness, i.e. schizophrenia. The respondent-wife stated to have left the matrimonial home around October, 2018, after which she never returned. Thus, the husband filed a petition for annulling their marriage on the ground of fraud under Section 12(1)(b). In the alternative the husband had sought divorce on the ground of cruelty under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib).

The Family Court, however, dismissed his application for divorce on the ground that the appellant failed to prove that the respondent was suffering from Schizophrenia since birth. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred this matrimonial appeal.

The Bench, speaking through Justice Prasad, held that though the appellant-husband has alleged that the respondent-wife was suffering from schizophrenia even prior to the marriage, but the record shows that except for certain medical prescriptions, no substantive or expert medical evidence was adduced to establish the mental condition of the respondent-wife either before or after the marriage.

Though the appellant claimed to have treated the respondent through two psychiatrists, the Court said, he failed to examine either of the doctors as witness in support of his case. Further, there is no certificate of diagnosis or any clinical record produced on record that can conclusively prove that the respondent was suffering from schizophrenia or any other mental illness to such an extent that would render the marriage voidable.

The judgment of Calcutta High Court in Sm. Anima Roy v. Probodh Mohan Roy (1968) was relied upon to hold that in the absence of medical expert's testimony and without examination of treating doctors, the Court cannot draw any conclusion regarding mental disorder of the spouse merely based on assumptions or prescriptions.

“The law is now well settled that in proceedings under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 the burden lies heavily on the appellant to prove the foundational facts justifying annulment of marriage. The mere filing of prescriptions or absence of rebuttal by the respondent does not absolve the appellant from discharging the burden of proof through cogent and trustworthy evidence,” it further added.

Therefore, against the backdrop of above position of law, the Court held that when the appellant omitted to examine the treating doctors as expert witnesses and failed to prove that the wife was suffering from schizophrenia since the time of marriage, mere filing of prescription would not suffice.

Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed affirming the Family Court's order.

Case Title: X v. Y

Case No: FA(MAT) No. 55 of 2023

Date of Judgment: August 14, 2025

Counsel for the Appellant: Mr. Tapan Kumar Chandra, Advocate

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. Pushkar Sinha, Advocate

Click Here To Read/Download Order