11:00 – 19:00In India, restitution of conjugal rights is a legal remedy available to a spouse who has been deserted by their partner and seeks to resume marital cohabitation. The remedy is available under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and similar provisions under other personal laws.
A restitution of conjugal rights decree is a court order that directs the respondent (the spouse who has left the matrimonial home) to return to the matrimonial home and live with the petitioner (the spouse who has filed the case) without any further delay. The court may also impose certain conditions such as payment of maintenance, regularity of visits to the matrimonial home, etc.
The restitution of conjugal rights is based on the principle that marriage is a sacred bond and that the parties to the marriage have a fundamental right to cohabit with each other. However, the remedy has been subject to much debate as it is seen by some as a violation of an individual’s right to privacy and liberty.
It is important to note that restitution of conjugal rights is not a criminal offense, and the court cannot force the respondent to resume marital relations. In case the respondent fails to comply with the order, the petitioner can seek a decree of judicial separation or divorce.
Overall, restitution of conjugal rights is a legal remedy available to a deserted spouse who seeks to save their marriage. However, it should be used with caution as it can be seen as an intrusion on an individual’s privacy and liberty.
There have been several landmark judgments by the High Courts’ regarding the restitution of conjugal rights in India. Here are some of the important ones:
Smt. Sujatha v. Dr. M. Ramesh: In this case, the Karnataka High Court held that a restitution of conjugal rights order cannot be passed by a court unless it is satisfied that the petitioner is willing to restore the matrimonial relationship and resume cohabitation with the respondent.
Mahesh v. Smt. Pooja: In this case, the court held that restitution of conjugal rights can only be granted if it is established that the refusal to cohabit is without reasonable cause. The court also held that the petitioner must show that they have not been guilty of any matrimonial offense and that they are willing to perform their marital obligations.
Smt. Jyoti v. Shri Manoj: In this case, the court held that an order for restitution of conjugal rights should not be granted if it would cause mental cruelty to the respondent.
These judgments show that the courts in India are careful when granting orders for restitution of conjugal rights and take into account the interests of both parties.
The concept of restitution of conjugal rights is available to all married couples in India, regardless of their religion. This remedy is available to Christians and Muslims as well as for those belonging to other religions. However, it is important to note that the rules and procedure for seeking restitution of conjugal rights may vary depending on the personal laws applicable to the parties.
In one of the significant judgments is from the Apex Court, the case of Daniel Latifi v. Union of India (2001). The Supreme Court held that the Muslim personal law, which provides for the restitution of conjugal rights, is constitutionally valid. However, the Court also held that restitution of conjugal rights cannot be enforced against the wife’s wishes and that a Muslim wife has the right to refuse to live with her husband without any reasonable cause. The Court in this case also ruled that the husband’s responsibility does not cease with the expiration of Iddat and that, in circumstances of the wife’s vagrancy or destitution, he must continue to support her and provide for her even after the usual term has passed.
The Court further held that in a case where a Muslim husband seeks restitution of conjugal rights, the court must examine whether there is any reasonable cause for the wife’s refusal to cohabit with her husband. If the court finds that the wife has refused to cohabit without any reasonable cause, the court may order restitution of conjugal rights. However, the court must also take into consideration the welfare of the wife and children before passing any such order.
Is Forcing a Wife for conjugal rights Domestic Violence
The issue of whether forcing a wife to restitution of conjugal rights amounts to domestic violence has been a matter of debate in India. However, the High Courts in India have generally held that forcing a spouse to restitution of conjugal rights can amount to domestic violence.
Section 3 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 defines domestic violence to include any act, omission or commission or conduct of the respondent that harms or injures or endangers the health, safety, life, limb or well-being, whether mental or physical, of the aggrieved person or tends to do so.
In several cases, the High Courts have held that forcing a wife to restitution of conjugal rights without her consent or against her will can amount to domestic violence. The courts have held that such acts can cause mental trauma, emotional distress and can be a violation of the woman’s right to privacy and autonomy.
For instance, in the case of Kiran v. Raj Kumar, the Punjab and Haryana High Court held that forcing a wife to live with her husband against her will and without her consent can amount to domestic violence under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
In conclusion, forcing a wife to restitution of conjugal rights without her consent or against her will can amount to domestic violence, as it can harm her mental and physical well-being and violate her right to privacy and autonomy.
Feel free to write to us at mail@lawyersonia.com or call +91 9845944896 if you wish to consult or discuss your matter. “Sonia and Partners” is a Boutique law firm led by Adv. Sonia Rajesh supported by a team of qualified and among the Best Lawyers in Bangalore practicing in the area of Family Law and Criminal defence serving Citizens of India, Overseas Indians, NRIs and Global International Clients.
