The Chhattisgarh High Court has ruled that a woman cannot be compelled to undergo a virginity test, as it infringes upon her fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life, personal liberty, and dignity.

Emphasizing that Article 21 is the "heart of fundamental rights," the court stated that allowing such a test would violate fundamental rights, the principles of natural justice, and the inherent modesty of a woman.

Justice Arvind Kumar Verma made these observations while hearing a criminal petition filed by a man seeking a virginity test for his wife. The petitioner alleged that she was involved in an illicit relationship and challenged a family court's decision dated October 15, 2024, which had rejected his interim application. In response, the wife accused her husband of being impotent and unwilling to cohabit.

The High Court held that if the petitioner wished to refute allegations of impotency, he could undergo medical examination or present other evidence. However, he could not force his wife to undergo a virginity test to fill gaps in his case.

The order, issued on January 9 and recently made available, categorically declared that demanding a virginity test is unconstitutional and a direct violation of a woman's right to dignity. The court reiterated that Article 21 ensures not only the right to life and personal liberty but also the right to live with dignity, which is essential for women.

"No woman can be forced to undergo a virginity test. It is a violation of her fundamental rights under Article 21," the court asserted.

Justice Verma further underscored that virginity tests undermine a woman's right to decency and dignity, stating that personal liberty under Article 21 is non-derogable and cannot be compromised.

"The petitioner cannot be allowed to subject his wife to a virginity test to bridge gaps in his evidence. Allowing such a test would be contrary to her fundamental rights, the core principles of natural justice, and a woman’s modesty," the court observed.

The court also clarified that non-derogable human rights are absolute and cannot be curtailed, even in times of war or emergency. Additionally, it pointed out that allegations from both sides remain subject to legal evidence, and a conclusion can only be drawn after proper evaluation.

"The High Court finds no illegality or judicial error in the family court’s decision, and the order under challenge is neither unlawful nor perverse," the bench concluded.

The couple, who married on April 30, 2023, under Hindu rites, lived together at the husband's residence in Korba district. The wife allegedly informed her family that her husband was impotent and refused to cohabit. Consequently, she filed an interim application on July 2, 2024, under Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) before the family court in Raigarh, seeking a maintenance allowance of Rs 20,000.

In response, the petitioner sought a virginity test for his wife, claiming she was in an illicit relationship with his brother-in-law and asserting that their marriage was never consummated.

On October 15, 2024, the family court rejected his request, prompting him to file a criminal petition in the High Court. The case is currently at the evidence stage in the family court