Divorces have become the unavoidable fact of life. However, most of us have doubts about whether the "husband will be forced to stay with wife in RCR"? But before we dive into the details of the same, let us know what RCR is and how it works in this blog.
People who can no longer live with their partners due to irreconcilable differences can apply for a mutual divorce petition. Restitution of Conjugal rights is the legal entitlement based on section 9 of the Hindu marriage act. Further, it is used as a remedy for a deserted spouse against the other. However, at first, you have to file a case for RCR. But is it possible that the court can force the husband to stay with the wife in RCR? Let us learn in detail.
Is it Possible that the Court can Force the Husband to Stay with the Wife in RCR?
Yes, it is quite possible that the court can force the husband to stay with the wife in RCR. But only if it is a case of abandonment of the spouse by the other without a reasonable excuse. Moreover, if the court finds the petitioner’s claim genuine on legal grounds, they can pass the RCR or Restitution of Conjugal Rights. Either the husband or wife can apply for the same.
However, on any grounds, such as if the receiver has asked for nullity of marriage or a decree of judicial separation, the court cannot pass the Restitution of conjugal rights. If the abandonment of the receiver is due to a valid reason, then the court cannot give the RCR. So, the court can force the husband to stay with the wife in RCR, provided it is a legally valid reason.
What is the Criteria or Condition for the Issue of RCR?
The court follows certain criteria or conditions for the issuance of RCR. Based on these conditions, the court decides whether the petition filed before it is valid or not. These are some of the requirements:
- The court can pass the Restitute of conjugal rights if the petitioner proves that the abandonment of their spouse is not for any valid reason.
The petitioner must provide solid evidence to prove that their spouse left them for a non-valid reason and only for selfish reasons. In such cases, the court can, without any hurdle, pass the conjugal rights in favor of the petitioner.
- If the petition filed by the petitioner is valid and trusted.
When it comes to proving a petition filed by the petitioner is solidly proved true and trusted by the court. In this case, also the court can pass the RCR petition. Because if the petitioner can prove their case solid before the point.
- The husband ignores the wife without any specific reason.
The court can issue a Restitute of conjugal rights to the petitioner if the husband ignores the wife without any specific reasons. In such cases, the court rules in favor of the wife. Further, they can issue RCR.
Thus, these are criteria through which a court can issue a Restitute of conjugal rights.
Explain the Details with an Example or Landmark Judgment
You can’t understand conjugal rights without a landmark judgment or example. Here are the details of one of the most landmark judgments in Restitute of conjugal rights:
-
Harvinder Kaur vs Harminder singh choudary
On 15th November 1983, the Delhi high court, under Justice A. Rohtagi’s bench, passed the judgment in favour of Harvinder Kaur. The decision goes as follows:
The husband raised the petition for conjugal rights in the Delhi high court. The wife further opposed the judgment and attacked the constitutional validity of section 9 of the Hindu marriage act.
- It also states that section 9 of the Hindu marriage act offends articles 14 and 21. Further declared it null.
- Moreover, the RCR filed by the husband was given for revision by the wife, and the court nulled articles 14 and 21.
- Per the judgment, both the wife and the husband have equal rights to file conjugal rights in case of abandonment.
- Further, the Restitute of conjugal rights aims to preserve the marriage relationship rather than disrupt it through a divorce or mutual separation.
- Most of all, bypassing the RCR, the court wants to unify the estranged couple and make their life better.
- No husband and wife are required to each other or abandon the other spouse for a reason which is not even valid.
- The decree of conjugal rights acts as a litmus paper. In other words, it works like a model of reconciliation between a couple. Further, each spouse is given one year to decide how to do it.
- Later a sub-section was added in the year 1976. This states that there is ground for divorce based on the non-resumption of cohabitation of the couple for more than a year.
-
T. Sarita Venkata Subaiah vs State
As per the judgment passed by the court in T. Sarita Venkata Subaiah vs. State, section 9 of the Hindu marriage act related to conjugal rights is unconstitutional. Because the law snatches the right to privacy for wives by forcing them to live with their husbands against their wishes. So, according to this judgment, the court ruled in favour of Sarita Venkata Subaiah. Rather than forcing her to live with her husband against her wish.
Thus, these are some landmark judgments that have approved conjugal rights and, at the same time, let us know the consequences of the same. Further, when you compare Harvinder Kaur’s verdict with T. Saritha Venkata’s subaiah’s, you can see the different dimensions th conjugal rights have modified themselves.
Conclusion
Overall, conjugal rights cannot be forced by the court, instead, they can be modified and passed by making essential amendments. After all, as per the Harvinder Kaur verdict, the court has stated that conjugal rights violate articles 14 and 21. Moreover, it also concludes that conjugal rights can only be applied if the case of abandonment sustains. Else, the couple is given the decree of mutual divorce. After all, you cannot force someone to stay with somebody against their wish.
However, the court can try to reconcile them by giving them a year to decide the same. Further, if willing, they can follow the conjugal rights and mend their relationships. Finally, enforcing conjugal rights for a husband to stay with his wife is only considered valid if they provide solid evidence to prove the same. Moreover, the court can rule in favour of the petitioner if they are satisfied with the given evidence. If you wish to know more about the topic, you can get in touch with the legal experts from Vakilsearch.
Read More:
