Court says wife had reasonable cause to live separately amid allegations of dowry demand, ill-treatment and withholding of documents; no ground to interfere with Family Court order.
The Chhattisgarh High Court has upheld a Family Court order rejecting a husband’s petition for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, holding that the wife’s separate residence was supported by reasonable justification.
A division bench of Justice Parth Prateem Sahu and Justice Sachin Singh Rajput dismissed the appeal filed by Praveen Kumar Yadav against the judgment of the Family Court, Jashpur, which had earlier refused to direct his wife, Smt. Priyanka Yadav, to return to the matrimonial home.
The couple married on February 7, 2022. According to the husband, the relationship was cordial until October 2022, after which the wife began living with her parents and refused to return despite repeated requests, personal visits, and a legal notice. He claimed he had made every effort to restore the marriage and that she had withdrawn from his society without sufficient cause.
The wife, however, alleged that she was subjected to cruelty, manhandling, and dowry demands soon after marriage. She claimed that her husband and in-laws demanded a Creta car and Rs. 5 lakh in cash, and that she suffered a miscarriage due to harassment and assault. She also alleged that the husband retained her important documents, including educational certificates, Aadhaar card, caste certificate, and bank passbook, and that she had approached the Sakhi Centre and other authorities with complaints.
After examining the pleadings and record, the High Court held that the husband had failed to prove that the wife’s withdrawal from matrimonial society was without reasonable excuse, which is the key requirement for relief under Section 9. The court observed that allegations of dowry demand, ill-treatment, miscarriage, and withholding of documents, taken together, provided a plausible and reasonable basis for the wife to live separately.
The bench also noted that the husband’s repeated visits and legal notice, by themselves, could not prove that the wife had no valid reason to stay away. Such expressions of willingness to resume cohabitation, the court said, must be assessed in the light of the overall circumstances and evidence on record.
Finding no perversity, illegality, or material infirmity in the Family Court’s decision, the High Court affirmed the dismissal of the husband’s petition and dismissed the appeal.
Bottom Line :
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Application for Restitution of Conjugal Rights under Section 9 - Withdrawal of wife from matrimonial society - Allegations of dowry demand, ill-treatment, and manhandling - Reasonable justification for wife's separate residence established - Application by husband for restitution of conjugal rights rightly dismissed.
Statutory provision(s): Section 9, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955; Sections 97, 98, CrPC
Praveen Kumar Yadav v. Smt. Priyanka Yadav, (Chhattisgarh)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2981057
