In India women can do anything, and law is with her, she can hide her past,CRIME,Murder even HIV and law will support her.
As per below judgement,Our Great law, without thinking about a Man life, or their Daughter Future,support HIV possitive women, Law is not even checking how she got HIV, If husband donated it to her then, its different question. Here Man is totaly innocent, and from whom she got HIV do not know, as nowdays most of women have had pre marital Affairs and many are call girls at thier collage time.
Thats how Indian Law Treat Indian men,always FIND GUILTY for not his mistakes.
Women get Divorce if man snor, but man will not get Even Wife has HIV
Judge denies divorce, tells man it’s his duty to look after ailing wife
Turning down a man’s plea for divorce, a family court in Pune has ruled that it is his moral duty to be with his HIV-infected wife and take care of her.
The man a 34-year-old businessman and resident of Bhawani Peth — had sought a divorce from his HIV-positive wife in 2006.
After hearing both parties, family court judge RV Deshmukh ruled that the petitioner was not entitled to a divorce. “HIV-infected persons need care and love, especially from near and dear ones,” the judge said. The husband was avoiding his wife because of her HIV status and wanted custody of their only daughter on the plea that he feared she would get infected.
Sunita Jangam and Goraksha Kale, counsel for the wife, hailed it as a landmark ruling. The petitioner had not only accused his wife of subjecting him to cruelty but had also alleged that she and her family members had concealed information about her condition at the time of their marriage.
According to the petitioner, when he got married on December 4, 1996, he was pursuing his MCom, while his wife, the daughter of a former MLA, was doing her graduation from a Mumbai college.
After marriage, she continued to stay in Mumbai. She started staying with her husband after May 1997.
The woman conceived in January 2000 and that is when her HIV status was diagnosed after a medical check-up. Both the husband and the unborn foetus were found to be HIV-negative.
The husband’s contention was that his wife had inflicted cruelty on him by trying to end her life. To that the court ruled that the petitioner had deposed that when he feared being infected, he himself had contemplated suicide.
Deshmukh, in his judgment, also rapped the petitioner saying he wanted a divorce only because his wife was HIV-positive. “But divorce is not sought on account of this, but on the grounds of cruelty and desertion,” the court said.
Tejaswi Sevekari, director of the NGO Saheli, welcomed the order. “This decision proves that a person living with HIVAids deserves to live like any other normal human being,” she said.
District government pleader SY Deshmukh also backed the verdict. “Even if the petitioner is ready to provide alimony and financial support to his wife after divorce, his duty as a husband does not end,” Deshmukh said.