Overview Of Restitution of Conjugal Rights under Hindu Marriage Act

Overview Of Restitution of Conjugal Rights under Hindu Marriage Act

As a result of marriage, a spouse’s rights are called Jugal Rights. These rights are their rights to the communities of the spouses. It was through British Rule that the requirement for restitution of conjugal rights was reached, but it is rooted in Jewish law.

All the requirements for marriage and divorce are governed by conjugal rights. The law includes all private laws pertaining to marriage, divorce, and alimony and maintenance payments.

Can you tell me what a conjugal right specifies?

According to Conjugal Rights, married couples should live together. According to Conjugal Rights, spouses have responsibilities and rights together and are biologically related.

  • Mental and emotional reassurance should accompany conjugal rights.
  • Household responsibilities are divided between married couples.

As stated in the Hindu Marriage Act Section 9) and Section 22 of the Special Marriage Act, the husband or wife can go to the regional district court for restitution of conjugal rights.

When the other spouse leaves the marriage without a suitable reason, the husband or wife can petition the regional district court for restitution.

  • An order for the “withdrawn” partner to return to the marital home can be granted by the provincial district court.
  • If the “offending” fails to comply with the order to return, his/her property may be attached.

An early assessment of Indian conjugal rights

  • After the Tirath Kaur case, the Haryana and Punjab High Court restored conjugal rights.
  • The wife’s primary duty is to remain under her husband’s roof and safety.
  • Physical and mental cruelty were considered acts of physical and mental cruelty in the 1980s when courts supported this rule.
  • It held in Sudarshan Kumar Chadha v Saroj Rani, a case from 1984, that Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act had a social meaning as an aid to preventing marriage breakups.
  • The provision was ruled invalid in 1983 by a single-judge court in T Venkatasubbaiah v T Sareetha.

Restitution of conjugal rights in an important judgment

An individual can seek restitution of conjugal rights when their spouse refuses to live together or withdraws from their respective halves’ society.

A few conditions must be met to file a case for the restitution of conjugal rights in order to let gender equality prevail.

  • It withdraws from the other spouse’s society or petitioner if the defendant refuses to live together.
  • Even if the spouses stay away, this is important to keep in mind.
  • When they remain in contact, or stay away for valid reasons like work, these situations cannot be considered social rejection, and a suite of Conjugal Rights cannot be filed.
  • Neither false statement nor unreasonable ground of refusal from the society of the “errant” were made in the petition.
  • In case of denial, the legal grounds are not required.

Wife and husband file restitution of conjugal rights

If any of the points below are valid, then the court can rule on restitution of conjugal rights.

  • The petitioner can confirm that their spouse has withdrawn from them without providing any convincing reason.
  • It is true that the petitioner (unhappy spouse) stated their case.
  • As far as the court was concerned, there was no legal basis for not offering restitution to the dissatisfied party.

The challenges associated with husbands’ conjugal rights

There is a possibility of challenging a number of laws, among them the right to protection of family. The 2017 judgment has posed potential challenges to many laws, including the right to restitution of conjugal rights.

According to the judgment, court-mandated restitution of conjugal rights amounts to a “coercive action” by the state, disregarding a person’s decisional and sexual autonomy, and private rights.

Why the Conjugal Rights Section Law needs to be challenged?

Rights are violated when:

  • In 2017, a nine-judge Bench of the Supreme Court acknowledged that the law violated the fundamental right to privacy.
  • As evidenced in the petition, it is argued that court-mandated conjugal rights repayment amounts to a “coercive act,” violating one’s independence, dignity, and privacy.

Abuse of the provision:

  • The misuse of this provision as an alimony and divorce protection should also be considered.
  • Divorce is usually filed from the spouse’s area of occupancy, and reimbursement is filed in the other spouse’s area.

The decision of the SC was not followed:

  • Women’s privacy and physical independence have been emphasized by the Supreme Court.
  • Courts cannot require two adults to live together if one does not wish to if there is no wedding ceremony.


  • In terms of conjugal rights, law is gender-neutral and gives husbands and wives the right to seek restitution, but women are unreasonably burdened.
  • Most often, women are forced into intermarriage when they return to their marital residences and are told spousal rape is not an offense.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *