Can allegations of impotency made in a matrimonial complaint amount to defamation? Allahabad High Court Answers

The Allahabad High Court has said that alleging impotency without a medical basis can amount to defamation; however, court clarified that such allegations would be protected if they are made in good faith before lawful authorities as part of a genuine matrimonial grievance.

Quashing the summoning order in a criminal defamation case against a woman, the bench of Justice Achal Sachdev held that accusations made by her against her husband regarding non-consummation of marriage were protected under Exception 8 to Section 499 IPC [corresponding to Section 356 (1) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (BNS)] because they were made before police authorities in connection with matrimonial disputes and criminal complaints alleging dowry harassment and cruelty.

The high court was hearing an application filed under Section 528 BNSS (previously Section 482 in the Code of Criminal Procedure) seeking quashing of a summoning order passed by a Gorakhpur magistrate in a complaint case under Section 500 IPC.

The matrimonial dispute and impotency allegation:

According to the case records, the marriage between the parties was solemnised in November 2022. The woman later initiated criminal proceedings alleging dowry harassment, domestic violence and cruelty. She also claimed that the marriage had not been consummated due to the husband’s medical condition.

The husband subsequently filed a criminal defamation complaint claiming that the allegations regarding impotency had damaged his image in society, among relatives and before his landlord after police inquiries began.

Before the high court, the woman argued that the statements had been made only in judicial and police proceedings to secure legal remedies and therefore could not constitute defamation. She also relied upon a medical report from Medanta Hospital, Gurugram, which allegedly showed low serum testosterone levels.

What did the court say on allegations of impotency?

Court observed that branding a person impotent without medical evidence could indeed amount to defamation. Justice Sachdev noted that such allegations cannot ordinarily be raised publicly merely because of a single instance of non-consummation on the wedding night.

Court further said that impotency can become a ground in matrimonial proceedings only when supported by medical examination and a chain of circumstances showing repeated non-consummation of marriage.

When are such allegations protected from defamation law?

Answering this, the high court referred to Exception 8 to Section 499 IPC, which protects accusations made in good faith before persons having lawful authority over the matter.

Court held that complaints made before police authorities in matrimonial disputes would ordinarily fall within this protection if they are linked to genuine grievances and are not made maliciously. It clarified that protection would not be available if allegations were knowingly false, irrelevant, or circulated publicly with intent to humiliate the other spouse.

Referring to Supreme Court precedent in Chaman Lal v State of Punjab (1970), court reiterated that “good faith” requires due care and caution while making accusations.

Finding that the allegations were first raised in an FIR connected to matrimonial cruelty and dowry allegations and were supported by subsequent medical material, the high court concluded that the statements had been made in good faith and without malice. It consequently quashed the summoning order issued against the woman in the defamation complaint.

Case Title: Xxx vs. State of UP and 2 others

Order Date: May 15, 2026

Bench: Justice Achal Sachdev