Case Note & Summary
The case involves a marital dispute between a husband (petitioner) and wife (respondent). The husband filed for divorce at Panvel, while the wife filed for restitution of conjugal rights at the Family Court in Nanded. In the restitution proceedings, the wife filed an application (Exhibit 35) seeking a direction that the husband either develop physical relations with her or be subjected to In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF) to enable her to give birth to a second child. The wife argued that she was 35 years old and desired a second child for companionship and for the psychological benefit of their existing son. The husband opposed the application. The High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad framed the issue of whether such a demand is legal and sustainable. The court held that the demand is illegal and unsustainable, as it violates the husband's right to bodily integrity and personal autonomy under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court emphasized that no person can be compelled to procreate against their will, and such a direction would be against public policy. The court dismissed the wife's application and allowed the husband's writ petition, setting aside the Family Court's order if any.
Headnote
A) Family Law - Restitution of Conjugal Rights - Forced Procreation - The wife's demand for the husband to either have sexual relations or undergo IVF to produce a second child is illegal and unsustainable - The court held that compelling a spouse to procreate against their will violates the right to bodily integrity and personal autonomy under Article 21 of the Constitution of India - Such a demand is against public policy and cannot be enforced (Paras 3-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a wife can compel her husband to either restore sexual relations or undergo In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF) to bear a second child, in a pending petition for restitution of conjugal rights.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, holding that the wife's demand for compulsory sexual relations or IVF is illegal and unsustainable. The court set aside the application Exhibit 35 and dismissed the wife's prayer.
Law Points
- Right to bodily integrity
- Right to refuse procreation
- Personal autonomy
- No forced sexual relations
- No forced IVF
- Public policy against forced procreation
