The Chhattisgarh High Court at Bilaspur has dismissed a husband’s appeal challenging the rejection of his application seeking restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. A Division Bench of Justice Parth Prateem Sahu and Justice Sachin Singh Rajput held that the wife had shown a reasonable basis for living separately.
The parties married on February 7, 2022. According to the husband, their relationship remained cordial until October 2022, when he left his wife at her maternal home after learning that her mother was unwell. He claimed that he and his family members subsequently made several attempts to bring her back, but she refused to return.
The wife, however, gave a different account. She alleged that she had faced ill-treatment, physical assault and demands for a Creta vehicle and ₹5 lakh in cash. She also alleged that she had suffered a miscarriage following the alleged assault and harassment. Complaints relating to her alleged harassment and domestic violence proceedings were also placed on record.
The Family Court, Jashpur, had rejected the husband’s application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act on November 20, 2023. The husband then approached the High Court challenging that decision.
The High Court noted that the issue was not simply whether the wife was living separately, but whether she had withdrawn from her husband’s company without a sufficient and reasonable cause.
The Bench considered the allegations of ill-treatment, the alleged dowry demand, the circumstances surrounding the miscarriage and the complaints and proceedings initiated by the wife. The Court also took note of the husband retaining her educational and other documents despite her requests for their return.
The Court observed:
"The mere fact that the appellant/husband made repeated visits to the parental home of the respondent/wife or issued a legal notice expressing his willingness to resume matrimonial cohabitation cannot, by itself, establish that her refusal to return was without reasonable cause. Such subsequent expressions of willingness have to be considered in the context of the circumstances prevailing between the parties and the evidence already brought on record."
The High Court held that the wife had furnished a reasonable and plausible explanation for remaining apart. It found that the husband’s repeated attempts to bring her back, by themselves, did not establish that her decision to live separately lacked reasonable cause.
Finding no perversity, illegality or material infirmity in the Family Court’s judgment, the Division Bench affirmed the decision and dismissed the appeal.
Case Title: Praveen Kumar Yadav v. Smt. Priyanka Yadav
Case Number: FA(MAT) No. 5 of 2024
