Delhi High Court rejects husband’s request for wife’s gender test

The man claimed that his wife was a transgender person and that she could not file a domestic violence case against him since she was not a biological woman.

The Delhi High Court today declined to entertain a writ petition filed by a man seeking the Court’s direction for the Delhi Police to conduct a gender test on his wife at a Central government hospital [Sumit Kataria V/s Commissioner of Police & Ors.].

Justice Sanjeev Narula raised concerns about the admissibility of a writ petition for such a request in what is essentially a matrimonial matter and refused to consider the case on its 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 man alleged that his wife was a transgender person and, therefore, could not file a domestic violence case against him since she was “not a woman.”

He requested a gender test to substantiate his claim regarding his wife’s gender identity.

Although the High Court refused to entertain the plea, the husband was granted the liberty to approach the court where his matrimonial case is pending for appropriate relief.

The man further claimed that his wife had hidden the fact that she was transgender, deceiving him into marrying her in 2020. He also alleged that she refused to consummate the marriage, citing various excuses, and eventually left the matrimonial home.

He claimed that he later discovered his wife was transgender, which caused him mental distress and violated his right to a legitimate marital relationship under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

He further alleged that his wife had filed multiple false cases against him, accusing him of domestic violence, making dowry demands, and seeking maintenance.

However, he argued that the domestic violence case against him was not valid, as his wife is not a biological woman. For the same reason, he contended that he is not obligated to pay her maintenance, asserting that matrimonial laws apply only to wives who are biologically female.