Restitution of Conjugal Rights

Conjugal rights refer to the right to stay together as a married couple. According to Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act (1955), it’s unlawful for either spouse to exclude the other from social circles without justification. The aggrieved party can seek court intervention to restitution of the conjugal rights.

What is Restitution of Conjugal Rights?

Restitution of Conjugal Rights is a legal claim under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. If one partner unjustifiably withdraws from the other’s company, the affected party can apply to the district court for the restoration of conjugal rights. In simple terms, it’s about re-establishing the companionship of a spouse who has left the relationship without a valid reason.

Section 9 and Restitution of Conjugal Rights

Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, deals with the concept of “Restitution of Conjugal Rights.” This section provides a legal remedy for situations where either the husband or the wife has, without reasonable excuse, withdrawn from the society of the other spouse.

The aggrieved party can seek restitution of conjugal rights by filing a petition in the district court. If the court is satisfied with the truth of the statements in the petition and finds no legal ground to deny the application, it may decree restitution of conjugal rights.

Key points regarding Section 9:

Grounds for Application: The provision is applicable when one spouse has unreasonably withdrawn from the company of the other. The aggrieved party, whether the husband or the wife, can initiate the legal process by filing a petition.

Purpose of Section 9: The primary objective is to restore conjugal rights, compelling the spouses to live together when one has unjustifiably stayed away. It is considered a marriage-saving clause, emphasising the importance of maintaining marital relationships.

Historical Context: The concept of restitution of conjugal rights has historical roots and was initially applied in England. The Privy Council in India recognised and implemented this remedy for the first time in the case of Moonshee Basloor v. Shamsoonaissa Begum.

Removal of Remedy in England: While this matrimonial remedy was initially part of English law, it was removed in 1970.

Requisites for Section 9:

• The spouses must not be residing together.
• The withdrawal of one party from the other should lack a reasonable ground.
• The aggrieved party must actively apply for restitution of conjugal rights.

In essence, Section 9 serves as a legal mechanism to encourage the reunion of spouses when one has unreasonably withdrawn from the other’s company. It underscores the importance of marital unity and provides a structured process for seeking the restoration of conjugal rights in cases where withdrawal is unjustified.

Who Can Seek Relief?

Either spouse, when one has unjustly withdrawn from the other’s society without sufficient justification, can petition the district court for restitution of conjugal rights. The court examines the truth of the petition and ensures no legal reason to deny restitution.

Why is The Relief Given?

The legislature provides a statutory remedy for spouses to reclaim the company of the one who left without good reason, aiming to protect the sanctity and legality of marriage.

When & Where To File The Petition for Restitution of Conjugal Rights?

The district court has jurisdiction when a spouse is unjustly excluded. For the restitution of conjugal rights under the Hindu Marriage Act, the Principal Judge of the Family Court is invoked. The petition is filed where the marriage was solemnised, where the respondent resides, where the parties last lived together, or, if the wife is the petitioner, where she resides on the petition filing date.

Conjugal Rights of Husband

Conjugal rights, stemming from marriage, involve the right of a husband or wife to the company of their spouse. These rights are recognised in personal laws governing marriage, mutual divorce and family-related matters. If a wife violates the husband’s conjugal rights, he can seek legal assistance to restore them, as many personal laws explicitly prohibit the denial of conjugal rights.

Benefits of Restitution of Conjugal Rights (RCR) for Husband

RCR benefits vary depending on each case. It is often used as a strategy to encourage the other party to agree to a divorce. If RCR is granted but the wife refuses to reunite, the husband can request attachment of her property. If, after a year, the partner continues to stay apart, the husband may apply for divorce. A negative RCR judgment does not invalidate a legitimate divorce filing.

How the Court Can Refuse to Grant an Order of Restitution of Conjugal Rights (RCR)?

The court may refuse to grant an Restitution of Conjugal Rights order if:

• There is harshness from the husband or in-laws.
• The husband fails to fulfill marriage commitments.
• The husband fails to pay a fast dower.

Procedure and Steps for Restitution of Conjugal Rights

Step 1: File the Petition

Initiate the process by submitting a petition to the district court seeking restitution of conjugal rights.

Step 2: File the Reply

The respondent, upon receiving the petition, responds by filing a reply, presenting their side of the situation.

Step 3: Present the Petitioner’s Evidence

The petitioner provides evidence supporting their claim for restitution, such as documentation or witness statements.

Step 4: Present the Respondent’s Evidence

The respondent presents evidence to counter the claims made by the petitioner.

Step 5: Present the Arguments

Both parties present their arguments, outlining their positions before the court.

Step 6: Present the Judgment & Decree

The court evaluates the evidence, arguments and legal aspects and issues a judgment and decree regarding the restitution of conjugal rights.

Constitutional Challenge Before The Hon’ble Supreme Court

In a landmark case of Smt.Saroj Rani vs. Sudarshan Kumar Chadha, 1984 AIR 1562 in 1984, the constitutional validity of Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA) was contested before the Supreme Court. The court clarified that conjugal rights, which involve a spouse’s right to be in the company of the other spouse, do not hold the status of legal authority in India. The judgment emphasised that divorce is a legal right inherent in the institution of marriage.

The Hindu Marriage Act, particularly Section 9, was found to have adequate safeguards to prevent potential abuse. The court concluded that Section 9 does not contravene Article 14 or Article 21 of the Constitution when viewed in the context of the purpose behind the decree for restitution of conjugal rights. This ruling overturned a previous decision by the Andhra Pradesh High Court.

A recent challenge in Ojaswa Pathak and Anr. vs. Union of India, WP (C) 250/2019 to the constitutional validity of Section 9 of the HMA was brought before the Supreme Court in the case of Ojaswa Pathak and Anr. vs. Union of India (WP (C) 250/2019). The outcome of this case is anticipated to be influenced by previous judgments of the Supreme Court, such as Justice KS Puttaswamy vs. Union of India (2017 10 S.C.C. 1), Navtej Singh Johar vs. Union of India ((2018) 10 SCC 1) and Joseph Shine vs. Union of India ((2019) 3 SCC 39), where the court declared certain legal provisions unconstitutional. These precedents are likely to impact the decision in the ongoing challenge.

Restitution of Conjugal Rights Under Christian Law

Christians in India have the right to seek restitution of conjugal rights under the Indian Divorce Act, 1869, through Sections 32 and 33. Section 32 allows either spouse to file a petition in the district or high court if one has unjustly withdrawn from the other’s society.

The court may grant restitution of conjugal rights after verifying the claims and finding no reasonable excuse to reject the petition. Section 33 specifies that only issues not leading to nullifying the marriage or a judicial separation lawsuit can be raised in defence against a restitution request.

Restitution of Conjugal Rights Under Muslim Law

In Muslim law, if a spouse unjustly withdraws from the other’s society or fails marital obligations, the court may decree restitution of conjugal rights to secure the aggrieved party’s rights. This is about ensuring legal rights and was traditionally associated with the specific performance of a contract. Unlike other laws, Muslim law requires a lawsuit for restitution instead of a petition.

Restitution can only be claimed in a legal marriage and is discretionary and equitable relief. If a wife refuses to live with her husband without a valid reason, he may file a lawsuit and she can request the fulfilment of marital responsibilities. The court generally supports the wife, requiring strict evidence for matrimonial relief, making this remedy not an absolute right. The husband has authority but is directed by the Quran to treat his wife kindly.

Conclusion

Restitution of Conjugal Rights, as outlined in Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, allows an aggrieved spouse to seek legal intervention when the other unjustifiably withdraws from marital companionship. Initiated by filing a petition in the district court, this remedy aims to restore conjugal rights by compelling the spouses to live together.

Historically rooted and first implemented in India by the Privy Council, it is a marriage-saving clause designed to maintain the sanctity of marital relationships. The spouses must not be cohabiting, the withdrawal must lack reasonable grounds and the aggrieved party must actively apply for restitution, emphasising the legal importance of spousal unity.