Marriage is usually seen as a journey from unfamiliarity to understanding and intimacy — but as days and years passed from this Jogeshwari resident’s nuptials, he found his wife’s behaviour increasingly bewildering and inexplicable. The 47-year-old, who was allegedly not told that his wife had mental problems at the time of his marriage to her back in 2005, was finally granted divorce by the court on June 1.
Anant Patil and Ghatkopar-based Amisha Patil were married in Vile Parle on July 10, 2005. Things proceeded well for a few days, but soon Anant noticed a disturbing change in Amisha’s behaviour. She would fall ill frequently, and require regular visits to the family doctor. But apart from the medication he prescribed her, Anant noticed that she would take certain other medication. He also claimed that her demeanour would appear altered after she consumed these pills. Judge Subhash R Kafre, recording the facts of the case in his order, stated, “She would not talk like a normal person. She would tell the petitioner [Anant] that she would see things that weren’t real — that is, she would hallucinate; she would start speaking with herself and imagine things. Due to [her] strange behaviour, [Anant] was disturbed.” From the time of their marriage, Amisha did not allow sexual intercourse with Anant. Kafre added, “[He] tried to convince [her]… but it was of no use.”
Finally, on August 12, 2006, Amisha left Anant without informing him, taking all her belongings and gold jewellery with her. She reappeared as mysteriously as she had disappeared nearly three years later, on September 10, 2009. She then handed over a prescription to him, admitting to him for the first time that she had been taking sleeping pills since 2002. According to Anant’s petition, Amisha’s kin had deliberately withheld this fact from him and his family.
Anant then filed for divorce, and the couple underwent marital counselling at the Bandra Family Court, in a last-ditch attempt at reconciliation. During the divorce proceedings, Amisha did not file her written statements rebutting Anant’s allegations against her. Kafre in his decree divorcing the couple on June 1 also referred to the fact that Anant was denied his conjugal rights for the entire duration of their troubled marriage. He observed, “[Anant has referred to] the strange and cruel behaviour of Amisha. He has categorically stated that the respondent used to avoid having sexual intercourse with him and therefore, he was deprived of his sexual needs. It appears that the petitioner was compelled to lead a sexless life for years together.”
(Names of litigants changed to protect privacy)