Delhi High Court refuses to entertain husband's plea for gender test of wife

The Delhi High Court today refused to entertain a writ petition filed by a man who urged the Court to direct the Delhi Police to conduct a gender test on his wife at any Central government hospital..Justice Sanjeev Narula questioned the maintainability of a writ petition for such a request in a purely matrimonial matter and declined to hear the matter on merits. “This is a purely matrimonial matter. A writ petition cannot be initiated against a private person ... You are asking for gender test, this has wide ramifications. Even more so since it is your wife,” Justice Narula observed..The petitioner's counsel eventually sought permission to withdraw the plea. Accordingly, the petition was dismissed as withdrawn. The man had claimed that his wife was a transgender person and that she could not, therefore, file a domestic violence case against him since she was 'not a woman.'He had sought the conduct of a gender test to prove his claim regarding his wife's gender identity. While the High Court said it cannot entertain this plea, the husband was given liberty move the court where his matrimonial case is pending for appropriate relief..The man alleged that his wife had concealed the fact that she was a transgender person and duped him into marrying her in 2020. He claimed that the wife had refused to consummate the marriage under some pretext or the other, before eventually leaving the matrimonial house. He said that he later got to know that his wife was transgender. The husband submitted that all of this caused him mental trauma and violated his right to a legitimate marital relationship under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.He further alleged that the wife has instituted several false cases against him accusing him of domestic violence, making dowry demands and to seek maintenance.However, he argued that the domestic violence initiated against him by his wife was not maintainable since she is not a biological woman. For the same reason, he argued that he is not liable to pay maintenance to his wife. He contended that all the matrimonial laws are with respect to a wife who is a biological female.Advocate Abhishek Kumar Choudhary appeared for the husband..[Read Order]