Introduction

• One of the fundamental purposes of marriage is that the spouses must live together, and that one spouse is entitled to society, comfort and consortium of each other. This is a unique feature which is often termed as conjugal rights.
• The expression conjugal rights connote the following:
  • The right of a couple to have each other’s society.
  • The right to marital intercourse.

Restitution of Conjugal Rights

• The expression restitution of conjugal rights means the restoration of conjugal rights which were enjoyed by the parties previously.
• Restitution of Conjugal Rights provided under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA).
• The objective of Section 9 is to protect the sanctity and legality of the institution of marriage.
• The aggrieved party may apply to the District Court for restitution of conjugal rights if the husband or wife is withdrawn from the other partner's company without any reasonable ground.
• The burden of proof is on the person who has withdrawn from society of the other person to prove that there has been a reasonable excuse to withdraw.

Essential Requirement for Seeking Relief under Section 9

• The parties must be legally married to one another.
• One should exclude themselves from another's social circle.
• This withdrawal has to be made without a valid justification.
• The assertion that there is no legal justification for rejecting the decree must be proven to the court's satisfaction.

Where to File an Application for Restitution of Conjugal Rights

Every petition filed under HMA must be filed in the Family Court of the original civil jurisdiction where:

• The marriage was solemnized.
• The respondent resides.
• The parties to the marriage last lived together.
• If the wife is the petitioner, where she has been residing on the date of filing the petition.

Effect of Restitution of Conjugal Rights

• A decree for restitution of conjugal rights, if passed, makes it obligatory for the respondent to resume cohabitation with the plaintiff.
• If this is not done within one year from the date of the decree, either party is entitled to seek divorce.

Case Law

• In the case of Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar Chadha (1984), the Apex Court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 9 of HMA as this section does not violate any fundamental right.