Is It Defamation To Call Husband 'Impotent'? What Bombay HC Said On Marital Dispute

A man dragged his estranged wife to court, alleging that she tarnished his image or reputation by calling him impotent in her divorce and maintenance filings.

Can a sensitive accusation made during a marital dispute amount to defamation? This question came up when a man dragged his estranged wife to court, alleging that she tarnished his image or reputation by calling him impotent in her divorce and maintenance filings. The case reached the Bombay High Court, compelling it to examine the balance between safeguarding personal dignity and protecting one's right to defend themselves in matrimonial battles. The court, in its ruling, decisively held that an accusation of impotency, if made in the context of divorce or maintenance proceedings, cannot be construed as defamation.

A single-judge bench led by Justice S.M. Modak dismissed the man’s criminal defamation complaint, ruling that such claims—however sensitive—are intrinsically tied to the grounds for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act. “This court feels that when litigation between spouses arises in a matrimonial relationship, then the wife is justified in making those allegations to support her interest,” the judge stated in the July 17 order, which was made public on Friday. He emphasized that these claims, when made in legal pleadings, are not defamatory.

What's The Case?

The petitioner had initiated a criminal case against his wife and her family members, alleging defamation after she referred to him as impotent not only in her divorce and maintenance petitions but also in a police complaint. He contended that since these statements were part of public records, they had irreparably harmed his social image.

However, the High Court found that the wife’s statements were made solely to substantiate her claims of cruelty and justify her plea for divorce. Since the remarks were confined to the framework of legal proceedings, the court ruled that they cannot be treated as defamatory.

The woman, along with her father and brother, had challenged a sessions court order that directed a magistrate to conduct an inquiry into the man’s defamation complaint. The High Court overturned the lower court’s directive, effectively quashing the proceedings.

Interestingly, this ruling deviates from a 2018 judgment by the Nagpur bench of the same High Court. Back then, Justice Sunil Shukre had ruled that calling someone “impotent” particularly outside a legal context amounts to defamation. He observed that the term directly attacks a man’s masculinity and could provoke ridicule or social ostracism, thus falling under Sections 499 (defamation) and 500 (punishment for defamation) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).