Infection of HIV virus leading to AIDS is covered by ground of divorce at Section 13(1)(v) of Hindu Marriage Act
It is not possible for us to accept the above submission of Mr.Anturkar. The term "venereal disease" is not defined anywhere and that is rightly so thereby removing the rigours of rigidity. It loosely describes a class of diseases that are transmitted not "exclusively" by s*xual contact but "chiefly" by s*xual contact. Some decades back the existence of HIV virus, it's means of transmission, it's infection and consequences thereof were unknown. Had the term been defined by specifying the diseases falling -11-
therein, it would have been impossible to consider the infection by HIV virus as a venereal disease. That being not the position, we will have to look for the common factors between the diseases that are accepted to be venereal diseases and the infection of HIV virus. The main common factor is the means of transmission. Like other venereal diseases of syphilis, gonorrhea, Hepatitis B etc., the infection of HIV virus is chiefly transmitted s*xually. The other means of transmission are less common. Merely because there are other means of transmission, it is not possible to restrict the meaning of "venereal disease" and omit infection of HIV virus therefrom.
provision.
Bombay High Court
Sunil Lakhotia vs Pratima Lakhotia, Hindu, Indian ... on 22 October, 2008
Bench: P. B. Majmudar, R.P. Sondurbaldota
