A mutual divorce petition can be filed by individuals whose irreconcilable differences prevent them from living together. According to section 9 of the Hindu marriage act, the legal right to restitution of conjugal rights exists. Additionally, it is utilized as a remedy for a deserted spouse. However, you must initially file a RCR case. But in RCR, is it possible for the court to compel the husband to remain with the wife? Let us investigate in depth.
Is it possible for the court to order the husband to remain in RCR with the wife?
Table of Contents
Yes, the court has the power to compel the husband to remain in RCR with the wife. However, only in cases where one spouse has abandoned the other without a valid reason. In addition, the court may grant the RCR, or restitution of conjugal rights, if it determines that the petitioner’s claim is legitimate. The husband or wife can both apply for the same position.
However, the court cannot grant restitution of conjugal rights for any reason, including the receiver’s request for nullity of marriage or a decree of judicial separation. The court cannot grant the RCR unless there is a valid reason for the receiver’s abandonment. As a result, the court can order the husband to stay with the wife in RCR if there is a legitimate reason for doing so.
What are the requirements or conditions for the RCR to be issued?
In order for the court to issue RCR, certain criteria or conditions must be met. The court decides whether or not the petition that was filed before it is valid based on these conditions. Some of the requirements are as follows:
- If the petitioner can demonstrate that their spouse’s abandonment was not for any legitimate reason, the court may grant the Restitute of conjugal Rights.
The petitioner must demonstrate with solid evidence that their spouse left them for no legitimate reason and only for their own selfish gain. The petitioner’s conjugal rights can be granted by the court in such instances without difficulty.
- if the petitioner’s petition is legitimate and trustworthy.
When it comes to demonstrating that a petition filed by the petitioner is solidly proven to be true and that the court has faith in it. The RCR petition can also be granted by the court in this instance. because if the petitioner is able to establish their solid case prior to the point.
- The husband doesn’t pay attention to the wife for no particular reason.
If the husband disregards the wife for no apparent reason, the court may grant the petitioner a Restitute of conjugal rights. The court rules in favor of the wife in such instances. They are also able to issue RCR.
Know more about: Conjugal Rights of Husband
As a result, a court can grant a Restitute of conjugal rights based on these criteria.
Provide an Example or Landmark Judgment to Explain the Details Without a landmark judgment or example, it is impossible to comprehend conjugal rights. The specifics of one of the most significant decisions in Restitute of conjugal Rights are as follows:
In the case of Harvinder Kaur v. Harminder Singh Choudary, the Delhi high court ruled in Harvinder Kaur’s favor on November 15, 1983, under the bench headed by Justice A. Rohtagi. The outcome is as follows:
In the Delhi high court, the husband filed a petition for conjugal rights. Further challenging the constitutionality of section 9 of the Hindu marriage act, the wife opposed the judgment.
Additionally, it states that the Hindu marriage act’s section 9 violates articles 14 and 21. It was also declared null.
Additionally, the wife submitted the husband’s RCR for revision, and the court upheld articles 14 and 21.
In the event of abandonment, the judgment states that the husband and wife have equal rights to file for conjugal rights.
In addition, the Restitute of Conjugal Rights aims to maintain the marriage rather than severing it through a divorce or a separation by mutual consent.
Most importantly, the court wants to bring the estranged couple back together and improve their lives by avoiding the RCR.
There is no requirement that a husband and wife be together or that one spouse leave the other for no reason at all.
The decree granting conjugal rights serves as a test. To put it another way, it functions as a model for a couple’s reconciliation. In addition, each spouse has one year to decide how to proceed.
In 1976, a subsection was added later. This says that if the couple hasn’t been living together for more than a year, they can get a divorce.
In the case of T. Sarita Venkata Subaiah vs. State, the court ruled that the Hindu marriage act’s section 9 regarding conjugal rights violates the Constitution. because wives’ right to privacy is violated by the law when they are forced to live with their husbands despite their wishes. Therefore, the court sided with Sarita Venkata Subaiah in this judgment. instead of making her live with her husband against her will.
As a result, these are some important decisions that have given conjugal rights their approval and shown us the consequences. In addition, when you contrast T. Saritha Venkata’s subaiah with Harvinder Kaur’s verdict, you can see how conjugal rights have changed in different ways.
Overall, the court cannot compel conjugal rights; rather, they can be modified and passed by making necessary changes. After all, the court ruled in Harvinder Kaur that conjugal rights violate articles 14 and 21. In addition, it concludes that conjugal rights can only be used if the abandonment case continues. Otherwise, a divorce decree is issued to the couple. In the end, you can’t force someone to stay with someone they don’t want to.
However, the court can attempt to reconcile them by granting them one year to reach a similar decision. They can also follow the conjugal rights and repair their relationships if they want to. Lastly, enforcing a husband’s conjugal rights to remain with his wife is only valid if they can provide solid evidence to support it. In addition, the court may rule in the petitioner’s favor if they are pleased with the evidence presented.
Read more,