38.6c New Delhi, India, Monday, February 23, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Three-Judge Bench Of SC To Hear Plea Challenging Provisions Governing Restitution Of Conjugal Rights

By LawStreet News Network      05 March, 2019 12:00 AM      0 Comments
Three-Judge Bench Of SC To Hear Plea Challenging Provisions Governing Restitution Of Conjugal Rights

The Supreme Court today (March 5, 2019) referred to a three-judge Bench a plea challenging the provisions relating to restitution of conjugal rights.

A Bench comprising of Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Sanjiv Khanna was hearing a petition filed by two law students from the Gujarat National Law University (GNLU) assailing the 1984 judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar Chadha wherein the court had upheld the validity of Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which provides for restitution of conjugal rights.

Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, states that When either the husband or the wife has, without reasonable excuse, withdrawn from the society of the other, the aggrieved party may apply, by petition to the district court, for restitution of conjugal rights and the court, on being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.

Section 22 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, and Order XXI Rule 32 and 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, are the other provisions that govern the restitution of conjugal rights.

The petitioners have sought for all the provisions related to the restitution of conjugal rights to be struck down on the ground that they are violative of the rights to privacy, individual autonomy and dignity of individuals which are guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Further, it was also contended that these provisions place a disproportionate burden on womenand is therefore violative of Articles 14 and 15(1) of the Constitution.



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

nobody-should-believe-anybody-before-marriage-sc-cautions-against-pre-marital-physical-relationships
Trending Judiciary
“Nobody Should Believe Anybody Before Marriage”: SC Cautions Against Pre-Marital Physical Relationships

Supreme Court cautions young adults on pre-marital relationships in a bail plea over rape on false promise of marriage; suggests mediation.

17 February, 2026 04:47 PM
allahabad-hc-refers-advocate-for-criminal-contempt-after-alleged-scandalous-remarks-during-bail-hearing
Trending Judiciary
Allahabad HC Refers Advocate for Criminal Contempt After Alleged Scandalous Remarks During Bail Hearing [Read Order]

Allahabad High Court refers advocate for criminal contempt over alleged scandalous remarks during a bail hearing in Uttar Pradesh.

17 February, 2026 05:15 PM
sc-declines-interference-in-case-concerning-tribal-village-entry-bans-on-pastors
Trending Judiciary
SC Declines Interference in Case Concerning Tribal Village Entry Bans on Pastors

Supreme Court refuses to interfere in plea against tribal village entry bans on pastors, asks petitioner to exhaust remedies under PESA Act.

17 February, 2026 05:35 PM
delhi-hc-sets-aside-dismissal-of-copyright-suit-over-local-commissioners-visit-to-additional-premises-expunges-findings-of-collusion-against-counsel
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Sets Aside Dismissal Of Copyright Suit Over Local Commissioner’s Visit To Additional Premises; Expunges Findings Of Collusion Against Counsel [Read Judgment]

Delhi High Court sets aside Commercial Court order dismissing copyright suit over Local Commissioner’s visit; expunges collusion findings against counsel.

17 February, 2026 06:53 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email