Synopsis
- Bare Act: The exact text of Section 9 of The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
- Introduction: Why Section 9 matters in Hindu marriage law.
- Meaning/Definition/Explanation: What ”restitution of conjugal rights” means legally.
- Interpretation: How courts understand and apply this section.
- Types/Classifications: Different scenarios where Section 9 applies.
- Case Laws: Important court judgments that explain Section 9.
- Multiple Questions: MCQs for All India Bar Exam preparation.
- Questions to Think About: Reflective questions for deeper understanding.
Bare Act
9. Restitution of conjugal right.— When either the husband or the wife has, without reasonable excuse, withdrawn from the society of the other, the aggrieved party may apply, by petition to the district court, for restitution of conjugal rights and the court, on being satisfied of the truth of the statements made in such petition and that there is no legal ground why the application should not be granted, may decree restitution of conjugal rights accordingly.
Explanation.— Where a question arises whether there has been reasonable excuse for withdrawal from the society, the burden of proving reasonable excuse shall be on the person who has withdrawn from the society.
Introduction
Section 9 talks about Restitution of Conjugal Rights. This means restoring harmony between spouses if one of them leaves the other without any justifiable reason.
In Indian marriages, living together and supporting each other is seen as a duty. So, when one spouse walks away from this relationship, the law gives the other a right to bring them back—not forcefully, but through a court order.
This section is important because it balances marital duties and individual rights. It also helps courts decide whether one partner is avoiding their responsibilities without a valid reason.
Meaning/Definition/Explanation
Imagine a situation where a husband and wife are living apart, not because they’re divorced, but because one of them has left the other without a valid reason. What can the person who’s been left behind do? This is where Section 9 of
The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, comes in. It’s a legal provision that allows a spouse to ask the court to help bring their partner back to live with them. This concept is called ”restitution of conjugal rights,” which basically means restoring the rights and duties of married life, like living together and supporting each other.
Let’s break it down simply:
- Restitution means restoring something that was lost.
- Conjugal rights means rights related to married life, like staying together, love, support, companionship, etc.
So, Restitution of Conjugal Rights means asking the court to help bring back your spouse who has left you without a valid reason.
Interpretation
The main idea behind this law Section 9 of The Hindu Marriage Act is to encourage couples to stay together and try to fix their marriage before things get worse, like leading to divorce. Courts don’t want to break marriages easily, so they use Section 9 to give couples a chance to reconcile (means to patch things up). But here’s not that simple. The court won’t just force someone to return home just because their spouse asked. The court checks a few things:
- Withdrawal from Society: This means one spouse has stopped living with the other, like moving out or refusing to share a home or life together.
- Without Reasonable Excuse: Did one spouse leave the other without a valid reason?
- Burden of Proof: If the person who left claims they had a valid reason, he/she (the person who left) have to prove it with evidence.
- Truth of the statements: Is the person asking for restitution sincere and not doing it for revenge? Where there is no lawful ground for denying the relief, the court may grant a decree for restitution of conjugal rights.
Courts have also said that Section 9 should respect personal freedom. In 1984, the Supreme Court in Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar Chadha said that Section 9 is constitutional (means it’s legally valid) because it aims to protect marriage, not force someone into slavery. But if the marriage is completely broken, courts may refuse to grant the decree, as forcing someone to live in a dead marriage makes no sense.
Types/Classifications
There are no strict types under Section 9, but courts look at the reasons for withdrawal. These may include:
| Type of Withdrawal | Explanation |
|---|---|
| 💔 Without Reasonable Excuse | Without valid reason or Arbitrary separation without any justification |
| 🚫 With Reasonable Excuse | Left due to cruelty, abuse, threat, etc. |
Only the first type allows the other spouse to use Section 9.
Case Laws
Let’s look at some important court cases that explain Section 9 better:
- Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar Chadha (1984): The Supreme Court said Section 9 is valid and doesn’t violate the Constitution. The wife left the husband without a good reason, and the court granted the decree for restitution, saying it helps save marriages.
- T. Sareetha v. T. Venkata Subbaiah (1983): An Andhra Pradesh High Court judge said Section 9 violates personal freedom and privacy, but this view was later overruled by the Supreme Court in Saroj Rani’s case.
- Harjeet Kaur v. Surjit Singh (1994): The court refused to grant restitution because the marriage was irretrievably broken, showing that courts won’t force couples to stay together if there’s no hope.
- Harvinder Kaur v. Harmander Singh (1984): Delhi High Court had an opposite view. It said Section 9 helps protect the institution of marriage and is not against fundamental rights.
- Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar Chadha (1984) (Supreme Court): Supreme Court upheld Section 9 as valid and constitutional. The court said it encourages reconciliation and does not violate Article 21.
These cases show how courts balance marriage duties with personal rights. They
also tell us that Section 9 isn’t a magic fix—it works only when there’s a chance
to save the marriage.
Multiple Choice Questions (for All India Bar Exam Preparation)
Here are some MCQs to help you prepare for the All India Bar Exam:
- What is the main purpose of Section 9 of The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955?
a) To grant divorce
b) To restore conjugal rights
c) To award maintenance
d) To punish cruelty
Answer: b) To restore conjugal rights - Who has the burden of proving a reasonable excuse for withdrawing from the spouse’s society?
a) The petitioner
b) The court
c) The person who withdrew
d) Both spouses
Answer: c) The person who withdrew - In which case did the Supreme Court uphold the constitutional validity of Section 9?
a) T. Sareetha v. T. Venkata Subbaiah
b) Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar Chadha
c) Harjeet Kaur v. Surjit Singh
d) None of the above
Answer: b) Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar Chadha - Can a court grant restitution if the marriage is irretrievably broken?
a) Yes, always
b) No, never
c) Only if both spouses agree
d) Depends on the case
Answer: d) Depends on the case - Under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, restitution of conjugal rights means:
a) Asking for maintenance
b) Asking for divorce
c) Asking the spouse to return and live together
d) Asking the spouse to adopt a child
Answer: c) Asking the spouse to return and live together - Which Article of the Constitution was used to challenge Section 9 in T. Sareetha v. Venkata Subbaiah?
a) Article 19
b) Article 21
c) Article 14
d) Article 25
Answer: b) Article 21 - Section 9 can be applied to:
a) Only the husband
b) Only the wife
c) Both husband and wife
d) Only children
Answer: c) Both husband and wife
Questions to Think About
Here are some questions to make you think deeper about Section 9:
- Is it fair to force someone to live with their spouse if they don’t want to, even if they don’t have a “valid” reason?
- How does Section 9 balance the idea of marriage as a sacred bond with modern ideas of personal freedom?
- Should Section 9 be removed from the law because it might violate privacy, or does it still have value in saving marriages?
- What kind of evidence would convince a court that a spouse had a “reasonable excuse” to leave?