PRAYAGRAJ: <\/em>The Allahabad High Court<\/strong>, in a judgment delivered by Justice Achal Sachdev<\/strong> on 15 May 2026, quashed a criminal defamation case filed by a husband against his wife after she alleged that the marriage could not be consummated because of his medical condition.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The case arose after the husband filed a complaint under Section 500 IPC<\/strong> claiming that his reputation was damaged when his wife allegedly called him \u201cimpotent\u201d<\/strong> before family members, police authorities and in matrimonial proceedings<\/strong>. The husband argued that these allegations spread in society and caused humiliation to him and his family.<\/p>\n\n\n\n According to court records, the marriage took place on 25 November 2022. The wife later claimed that the marriage was never consummated<\/strong> and alleged that the husband\u2019s medical condition had been hidden before marriage. She also filed criminal proceedings relating to dowry harassment, domestic violence<\/a> and cruelty.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The husband thereafter filed a defamation complaint against her, following which the trial court in Gorakhpur passed a summoning order on 21 December 2024. Challenging that order, the wife approached the High Court under Section 528 BNSS<\/strong> seeking quashing of the proceedings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n During the hearing, the wife argued that the allegations were made only in connection with legal proceedings and complaints before lawful authorities. She also relied upon a medical examination report from Medanta Hospital<\/strong>, Gurugram dated 27 August 2024 which allegedly showed low serum testosterone levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Court examined whether such allegations amounted to criminal defamation under Section 499 IPC<\/strong>. While discussing the law, the Court reproduced:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cException 1 of Section 499 I.P.C.-Imputation of truth public good requires to be made or published. It is not defamation to impute anything which is true concerning any person, if it for the public good that the imputation should be made or published. Whether or not it is for the public good is a question of fact.\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n The Court further stated:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAlleging impotency without any medical evidence on the date on which such an imputation has been made would definitely amount to defamation.\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Chaman Lal Vs. State of Punjab (1970) 1 SCC 590<\/em><\/strong>, the Court observed that good faith requires care, caution and genuine intention without malice.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n After considering the facts, the High Court concluded that the wife\u2019s allegations were made in connection with her matrimonial grievances, allegations of dowry harassment and non-consummation of marriage. <\/strong>The Court held that the statements were not made with malicious intent to publicly humiliate the husband.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Court finally observed:<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cIt clearly shows that the statement has been made in good faith without malice towards opposite party no.3 and her statement is substantiated by medical examination report of opposite party no.3, therefore, the order impugned has been passed without considering these aspects and is liable to be set aside.\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n Accordingly, the Allahabad High Court allowed the petition and quashed the summoning order passed against the wife<\/strong> in the criminal defamation case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
Explanatory Table: Laws And Sections Involved<\/h3>\n\n\n\n