The Jharkhand High Court has dismissed a husband’s appeal seeking restitution of conjugal rights, holding that the wife had valid and reasonable grounds to live separately. The division bench made it clear that a married woman cannot be compelled to abandon her career or dignity in the name of marital obligation.
The ruling came in F.A. No. 274 of 2023, where the husband had challenged a Family Court order that had earlier refused to direct his wife to return to the matrimonial home.
Read also:- Adopted Child’s Caste Same as Adoptive Parents, Biological Origin Irrelevant: Bombay High Court
Background of the Case
The case was filed by Jitendra Azad, who married Meena Gupta in March 2018. After a brief period of cohabitation, differences arose between the couple.
According to the husband, his wife left the matrimonial home without reason and later took up a government teaching job without informing him. He alleged that she refused to return despite repeated requests and sought a decree of restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
The wife, however, told a very different story before the Family Court. She claimed she was harassed for dowry, pressured to bring ₹10 lakh for purchasing a Scorpio vehicle, and was repeatedly asked to quit her job. She maintained that she was willing to live with her husband but not at the cost of her dignity and career.
Read also:- Delhi High Court Rejects Lapse Claim in 1960s Land Acquisition, Says Compensation Was Properly Deposited
Arguments Before the High Court
The husband’s counsel argued that:
- The wife had withdrawn from the marriage without reasonable cause
- The Family Court ignored key evidence
- The husband was always willing to resume marital life
On the other hand, the wife’s counsel submitted that:
- She was subjected to dowry demands and mental harassment
- She was pressured to quit her teaching job
- The husband made no real effort to support the marriage
- She had sufficient cause to live separately
Court’s Observations
After examining the evidence, the Division Bench of Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Arun Kumar Rai upheld the Family Court’s findings.
The court observed:
“A wife cannot be compelled to abandon her profession or self-respect in the name of matrimonial obligations.”
The judges noted that evidence on record showed consistent pressure on the wife to leave her job and bring money from her parental home. The court also took into account that the wife had a stable government job and was financially independent.
Read also:- Supreme Court Restores ₹27 Crore Damages in Solar Power Delay Case, Limits Courts’ Power to Rework Awards
The bench emphasized that restitution of conjugal rights cannot be granted mechanically and must depend on whether the spouse seeking relief has acted fairly.
Quoting settled legal principles, the court said:
“Where a spouse has reasonable cause to live separately, the remedy under Section 9 cannot be granted.”
Key Findings of the Court
- The wife had valid reasons to live separately
- Dowry-related pressure and job-related disputes were proved
- The husband failed to show that the wife withdrew without cause
- A working woman cannot be forced to sacrifice her career
- No perversity was found in the Family Court’s judgment
The bench also observed that marriage requires mutual respect and understanding, not dominance or coercion.
Read also:- Kerala High Court Tightens Oversight on Travancore Devaswom Digitisation After Nilakkal Petrol Pump
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the husband’s appeal, affirming the Family Court’s order dated 16 June 2023.
“The appeal fails and stands dismissed,” the bench ruled.
No relief was granted to the husband, and the wife’s right to live separately was upheld.
Case Title: Jitendra Azad vs Meena Gupta
Case Number: F.A. No. 274 of 2023
Decision Date: 28 January 2026
