RAJENDAR PERSHAD BHARDWAJ Vs. SHANTI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal raised essentially human problems and exposes the inadequacy of the present judicial system to solve them, because the Courts do not have at their command satisfactory and necessary resources and techniques to probe deeper into the problems than warranted by the strait--jacket evidence led before them. The case emphasises the urgent need for adequate marriage counselling services. This is the sad story of an ill--fitted young couple unable to consummate their marriage, each throwing the blame on the adequacy of the other. The needless and unhappy mutual recrimination would have been avoided and the marriage might yet have been made a success instead of floundering in the Matrimonial Court, if the two young people concerned in the tragedy had early expert advice and guidance. The liberalisation of the grounds and procedures for divorce etc. is, without doubt, a welcome step in the right direction, since it is pointless to prop up broken--down marriages. But, there certainly are marriages which are well--worth saving. The consequences of divorce and annulment of marriage, such as the emotional shock, the collapse of one's world, the wounded pride, the difficulty of re--building one's life, can be far more shattering than the seemingly simple solutions, of divorce and annulment of marriage, to marital troubles. Timely intervention and advice by expert marriage counsellers may avert disaster and may help marriages about to break down to blossom into happy marriages. Young people, confronted with problems too great for them and running into storms which they cannot weather alone, are be--wildered by what is happening to them. At that stage, what they need is the understanding and helpful guidance of an expert marriage counsellor who can save rather than break the marriage. It is of the utmost importance that side by side with the liberatlisation of the grounds and procedure for divorce, annulment of marriage etc., well--trained and well--equipped marriage--counselling services should be developed. Perhaps if such services were available, the very marriage with which I am now concerned could be saved.

(2.) The petitioner and respondent were married on 6-3-1972 according to Hindu rites. Just two months after the marriage on 11-5-1972, the husband filed a petition under S. 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act for annulment of the marriage on the ground that the wife was impotent. He stated in the petition:-" The parties never cohabited as husband and wife after marriage though they remained at Hissar, for the reason the respondent being impotent. There is no issue from this wedlock. The respondent was impotent at the time of marriage and continued to be so until the institution of these proceedings. The marriage was never consummated between the parties on account of impotency of the respondent." That was the entire allegation made by the husband in the petition. He did not give any particulars of the alleged impotency of the wife. He did not say whether the impotency was due to any physical defect or whether it was due to emotional inadequacy.

(3.) The wife filed a written statement denying the allegations of the petitioner. She counter--alleged as follows:-" The petitioner is taking advantage of his own wrong. His mental and physical condition makes consummation of marriage a practical impossibility. He is himself impotent for the respondent and makes no attempt for consummation of marriage. He has got hatred and dislike for the respondent." The petitioner filed a reply in which he denied the allegation of the wife and reiterated his case that the wife was impotent. He added that he had made attempts for consummation of marriage right from the time of marriage but the marriage could not be consummated as the wife was impotent and would not "admit to cohabitation".