The husband opposed the wife’s plea. The Bench, in turn, asked whether the husband’s objection was limited to the use of his sperm or whether he opposed his estranged wife becoming a mother altogether.
“What is the problem? Wife having a child with your sperm or from a donor?” Justice Govindaraj asked.
The Court added that if the wife is permitted to conceive through a donor before the divorce proceedings are over, the estranged husband could be insulated from all legal or maintenance obligations arising from the birth of the child.
Addressing the woman’s counsel, the Court said,
“You will have no claim for any property or any other right. You will not have any claim against (the husband) for any property or maintenance, or otherwise. You won’t have any claim whatsoever.“
The Court also indicated that if required, it could consider issuing directions to clarify that the child born out of IVF would not have succession or maintenance claims against the husband.
The husband’s counsel sought time to obtain instructions from his client upon the Court making this suggestion.
