WOMEN CAN NOT BE FORCED UNDER RESTITUTION OF CONJUGAL RIGHTS , SAYS THE SUPREME COURT

The Supreme Court stated that a woman is not a chattel who can be forced to live with her husband. The court was hearing a case in which a man sought a court order compelling his wife to remarry him. A slave or a tangible item of property is referred to as a chattel.

“What do you think? Is a woman a chattel that we can pass such an order? Is a wife a chattel that she can be directed to go with you?” asked an SC bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hemant Gupta while hearing the man’s petition.

The argument is centered on the restitution of conjugal rights order issued in April 2019 by a family court in Gorakhpur in favor of the man under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA). After their marriage in 2013, the woman said she was tormented by her husband over dowry, forcing her to leave. After she filed a lawsuit for support in 2015, a Gorakhpur court ordered her husband to give her 20,000 rupees per month. Following this, the husband petitioned the family court for the restoration of conjugal rights.

The guy went to court after the Gorakhpur family court issued its reparation judgment, wondering why he should have to pay maintenance when he is willing to live with her. He brought up a legal issue regarding his responsibility to pay maintenance even after getting an injunction restoring his conjugal rights. He appealed to the Supreme Court after the Allahabad high court denied his request.

The woman’s lawyer, Anupam Mishra, said in her defense that the husband’s entire “game” was to avoid paying maintenance and that he only went to the family court after being compelled to do so.

The man’s lawyer stated during Tuesday’s session that the top court should convince the woman to return to her spouse, especially since the family court had ruled in his favor. Mishra, who is representing the wife, replied that the verdict is being appealed to the Allahabad high court.”Is a woman a chattel?” the bench wondered in response to the man’s continuous demand for his wife’s return. Is a wife considered a chattel? You’re asking us to pass an order for this as if she’s a chattel who can be taken to a place she doesn’t want to go.” The husband’s motion for enforcement of conjugal rights was denied by the bench, which reminded him that his appeal to the Supreme Court stemmed from the Allahabad high court’s dismissal of his petition challenging the order to pay maintenance.

The woman said that the husband’s only intention was to avoid paying the maintenance. The man however said that the court should persuade the wife to go back to him, especially since the family court ruled in his favor. “Is a woman a chattel? Is a wife a chattel? You are asking us to pass an order for this as if she can be sent to a place where she does not want to go, like a chattel,” the Bench remarked when the man continued to insist that the wife be persuaded to live with him.

Meanwhile, the woman’s lawyer informed the judge that she wants a divorce because her husband is harsh to her.

“We are prepared to drop the IPC case 498A (cruelty to a married woman). We also don’t want any alimony. She is adamant that she will not live with him “Her lawyer stated.

The court had previously referred the case to mediation, stating that because they were both educated, they would want to settle their matrimonial conflict rather than go to court, which would prolong their suffering.

You may also like

Related Posts

DISCLAMER:

This website has been designed only for the purposes of dissemination of basic information on RR Associates; information which is otherwise available on the internet, various public platforms and social media. Careful attention has been given to ensure that the information provided herein is accurate and up-to-date. However, RR Associates is not responsible for any reliance that a reader places on such information and shall not be liable for any loss or damage caused due to any inaccuracy in or exclusion of any information, or its interpretation thereof. Reader is advised to confirm the veracity of the same from independent and expert sources.

This website is not an attempt to advertise or solicit clients, and does not seek to create or invite any lawyer-client relationship. The links provided on this website are to facilitate access to basic information on RR Associates, and, to share the various thought leadership initiatives undertaken by it. The content herein or on such links should not be construed as a legal reference or legal advice. Readers are advised not to act on any information contained herein or on the links and should refer to legal counsels and experts in their respective jurisdictions for further information and to determine its impact.

RR Associates advises against the use of the communication platform provided on this website for exchange of any confidential, business or politically sensitive information. User is requested to use his or her judgment and exchange of any such information shall be solely at the user’s risk.