seen from Malaysia
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Philippines
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Denmark
seen from United States
seen from Spain
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from China
seen from United States
seen from Germany
seen from United States
seen from Israel
seen from Netherlands
A detailed legal breakdown of the Eluru Pastor POCSO case involving allegations of sexual assault on a minor. Explore the applicable sections under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), POCSO Act punishments, investigation procedure, and victim protections under Indian law.
Complete legal analysis of the Eluru Pastor rape case involving a minor under POCSO Act and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
"When a government agency or department has been corrupted, sometimes a complete reformation is needed. Wrongs must be righted for that department or agency to be reclaimed for the nation's service…"
READ & LISTEN NOW: https://www.undergroundusa.com/p/the-aps-contorted-view-of-reality
@everyone
An open letter to the U.S. Congress
Pass the “No Kings Act!”
1,255 so far! Help us get to 2,000 signers!
I’m writing in support of the “No Kings Act,” introduced by Leader Schumer in August. This bill would reassert Congress’s constitutional authority and curb the judiciary’s unchecked power.
The "No Kings Act" addresses several key issues:
Congressional Authority Under Article III: The No Kings Act uses Congress’s constitutional authority under Article III to set "Exceptions" and "Regulations" to the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction. This power has been historically recognized as an important tool to limit the Court's reach, particularly when it comes to cases that could undermine democratic governance.
Neutralizing the Trump v. United States Decision: Leader Schumer’s legislation aims to counteract the Supreme Court’s decision granting former President Trump—and all presidents—immunity from prosecution for official acts. By removing lower courts' jurisdiction over presidential immunity and removing the Supreme Court’s appellate authority in this context, the No Kings Act asserts Congress’s constitutional role in preserving the rule of law and ensuring accountability at the highest levels.
Legal Safeguards: The bill also limits the Supreme Court's ability to review the bill's constitutionality, thereby reinforcing Congress’s role in determining the boundaries of judicial authority. This is not only a constitutionally justified action but also a necessary measure to protect democratic norms from judicial overreach.
If we don’t set limits on the power of a sitting president, or on our out-of-control Supreme Court, our democracy will suffer—greatly. Please support the No Kings Act. Thanks.
▶ Created on September 24 by Jess Craven · 101 signers in the past 7 days
📱 Text SIGN PLBYTZ to 50409
🤯 Liked it? Text FOLLOW JESSCRAVEN101 to 50409
Text SIGN PLBYTZ to 50409 to send this to your officials.
"On whether the president had exclusive removal power, the first Congress decisively answered no. If post-ratification history is relevant to constitutional meaning, the “Decision of 1789” presents more challenge than support for the unitary theory, with implications for Seila Law v. CFPB, independent agencies, independent prosecutors, the Trump subpoena cases, and justiciability."
The Indecisions of 1789
Constitutional Challenge to Nairobi–National Government Agreement Proceeds to Hearing
Restitution of Conjugal Rights in India: Complete Legal Guide for 2026
Can a Court Force a Husband or Wife to Return? Complete Analysis of RCR Petitions in India
What is Restitution of Conjugal Rights?
NEW DELHI: Restitution of Conjugal Rights (RCR) is a matrimonial remedy available to a spouse whose husband or wife has withdrawn from their society without a reasonable excuse. Through an RCR petition, the aggrieved spouse requests the Family Court to direct the other spouse to resume matrimonial cohabitation and fulfil marital obligations.
The concept originated in English matrimonial law and was incorporated into various personal laws in India. The underlying objective is to preserve the institution of marriage by providing an opportunity for reconciliation before the relationship reaches an irreversible breakdown.
However, while the law continues to recognize RCR as a legitimate matrimonial remedy, its practical effectiveness remains a subject of significant debate.
Laws Governing Restitution of Conjugal Rights in India
The remedy is available under several personal laws:
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act provides:
When either the husband or the wife has, without reasonable excuse, withdrawn from the society of the other, the aggrieved party may apply for restitution of conjugal rights.
Other Applicable Laws
Section 22, Special Marriage Act, 1954
Section 32, Indian Divorce Act, 1869
Section 36, Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936
Although the wording may vary slightly, the basic principle remains the same across these statutes.
Essential Ingredients of an RCR Petition
To obtain a decree for restitution of conjugal rights, the petitioner must establish the following:
Existence of a Valid Marriage: The parties must be legally married under the applicable personal law.
Withdrawal from Society: The respondent must have withdrawn from the company, cohabitation, or consortium of the petitioner.
Absence of Reasonable Cause: The withdrawal must be without a legally justifiable reason.
Bona Fide Intention of the Petitioner: The petitioner should demonstrate a genuine willingness to resume matrimonial life.
No Other Legal Bar: There should be no circumstances that would make it unjust or improper to grant the decree.
What Does “Withdrawal from Society” Mean?
The phrase “withdrawal from society” does not merely mean living separately.
Courts examine the overall conduct of the parties and consider:
Refusal to cohabit.
Leaving the matrimonial home.
Refusal to return despite requests.
Persistent abandonment of marital obligations.
Intention to permanently discontinue matrimonial relations.
Temporary separation due to employment, education, health concerns, or family responsibilities may not necessarily amount to withdrawal from society.
Defences Available Against an RCR Petition
An RCR petition is not automatically granted simply because spouses are living separately.
Read Also: Delhi High Court: A Wife’s Apathy Toward Her Elderly In-Laws Amounts to Cruelty
The respondent can oppose the petition by proving a reasonable excuse for the separation.
Common defences include:
Cruelty: Physical or mental cruelty is one of the most frequently raised defences.
Domestic Violence: A spouse cannot be compelled to return to an environment involving abuse or violence.
Dowry Harassment: Evidence of unlawful dowry demands may justify separate residence.
Adultery: The misconduct of the petitioner may constitute a valid defence.
Threat to Safety: Where living together would expose a spouse to danger or harassment, courts may refuse relief.
Other Justifiable Circumstances: Courts assess each case individually and may recognize various factual situations as reasonable grounds for separation.
Landmark Judgments on Restitution of Conjugal Rights
Sareetha v. T. Venkata Subbaiah (1983)
The Andhra Pradesh High Court held that Section 9 violated personal liberty and privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Court observed that compelling marital cohabitation could interfere with an individual’s bodily autonomy and personal freedom.
This judgment generated substantial constitutional debate regarding the validity of RCR.
Harvinder Kaur v. Harmander Singh Choudhry (1984)
The Delhi High Court took the opposite view and upheld the constitutional validity of Section 9.
The Court emphasized that matrimonial law seeks to preserve family relationships and that RCR is intended as a conciliatory remedy rather than a coercive one.
Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar Chadha (1984)
Read Also: “Supreme Court Eases Bail Rule in ₹9 Lakh Compensation Case Against Husband in Section 498A”
This remains the leading Supreme Court judgment on the subject.
The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 9 and observed that:
The object of RCR is reconciliation.
The provision does not violate Articles 14 or 21.
The remedy aims to preserve marriages whenever possible.
Courts cannot physically compel cohabitation.
This decision continues to govern the field today.
Ojaswa Pathak v. Union of India
The constitutional validity of RCR has once again been challenged before the Supreme Court.
The petition raises questions regarding:
Privacy rights.
Bodily autonomy.
Dignity of individuals.
Compatibility of RCR with modern constitutional principles.
The matter remains pending and may significantly impact the future of matrimonial law in India.
Procedure for Filing an RCR Petition
The process generally involves the following stages:
Step 1: Consultation and Case Assessment
A lawyer evaluates whether the facts support an RCR claim.
Step 2: Drafting the Petition
The petition sets out the marriage details, circumstances of separation, and relief sought.
Step 3: Filing Before the Family Court
The petition is filed before the Family Court having territorial jurisdiction.
Step 4: Issuance of Notice
Read Also: Delhi High Court Grants Eviction of Son & Daughter-in-Law, Upholding Legal and Moral Duty to Provide for Elderly Mother
The court issues notice to the respondent spouse.
Step 5: Mediation and Reconciliation
Family Courts usually attempt settlement and reconciliation before proceeding with trial.
Step 6: Evidence
Both parties present documents, witnesses, and other evidence.
Step 7: Final Judgment
The court decides whether the withdrawal was without reasonable excuse and whether an RCR decree should be granted.
Documents Commonly Required
Depending on the facts of the case, the following documents may be relevant:
Marriage certificate.
Wedding photographs.
Identity and address proofs.
WhatsApp chats.
Emails and text messages.
Call records.
Letters exchanged between parties.
Witness statements.
The quality of evidence often plays a crucial role in determining the outcome of the case.
What Happens After an RCR Decree?
If the Parties Reconcile
The spouses resume cohabitation, and the dispute effectively comes to an end.
If the Decree Is Not Obeyed
A common misconception is that the court can force a spouse to return.
This is incorrect.
Indian courts cannot physically compel a husband or wife to live with the other spouse.
Read Also: New Approach to Maintenance cases- Throw the kitchen sink
Execution of an RCR decree is limited and generally involves attachment of property in accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure.
RCR and Divorce
One of the most important legal consequences of an RCR decree relates to divorce proceedings.
Under Section 13(1A) of the Hindu Marriage Act, either spouse may seek divorce if there has been no resumption of cohabitation for one year after the decree.
Consequently, many matrimonial disputes follow the sequence:
RCR Petition
RCR Decree
No Reconciliation
Divorce Petition
For this reason, RCR is often described as a stepping stone towards divorce rather than a mechanism that genuinely restores married life.
RCR and Maintenance Proceedings
The filing of an RCR petition does not automatically stop maintenance claims.
Courts examine the facts of each case independently.
Depending on the circumstances, maintenance may continue under:
Section 125 BNSS.
Hindu Marriage Act provisions.
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
However, the conduct of the parties and findings recorded in RCR proceedings may influence related matrimonial litigati
Practical Reality of RCR Cases in India
While the law presents RCR as a remedy for reconciliation, the reality in Family Courts is often different.
Many RCR petitions are filed for strategic reasons, including:
By Husbands
To demonstrate willingness to continue the marriage.
To counter allegations of desertion.
To strengthen their position in maintenance disputes.
To create a record for future divorce proceedings.
By Wives
To establish abandonment.
To reinforce claims in connected matrimonial proceedings.
To improve litigation strategy.
As a result, successful RCR decrees do not always lead to actual reconciliation.
In many cases, the parties remain separated and eventually pursue divorce or other matrimonial remedies.
Read Also: Timeline prescribed for disposal of matrimonial dispute suppressed by the wife; 25,000 cost imposed by Orissa HC
CONCLUSION
Restitution of Conjugal Rights remains a legally recognized remedy under Indian matrimonial law in 2026. The Supreme Court continues to treat Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act as constitutionally valid, although fresh constitutional challenges remain pending.
From a practical perspective, RCR serves multiple purposes. It may facilitate reconciliation in some cases, but it is also frequently used as a strategic tool in broader matrimonial litigation involving maintenance, desertion, and divorce.
Anyone considering filing or defending an RCR petition should carefully evaluate both the legal consequences and the practical realities before proceeding.
FAQs
Can a husband file a Restitution of Conjugal Rights (RCR) petition against his wife? Yes. Under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, either spouse can file an RCR petition if the other spouse has withdrawn from their society without a reasonable excuse.
Can a court force a husband or wife to live together after granting an RCR decree? No. Indian courts cannot physically compel spouses to cohabit or resume marital relations. The decree is enforceable only through limited legal mechanisms such as attachment of property.
Can an RCR petition be filed after a maintenance case has already been filed? Yes. An RCR petition and a maintenance proceeding are separate legal remedies and can continue simultaneously before the competent courts.
What happens if the spouse does not comply with an RCR decree? If there is no resumption of cohabitation for one year after the decree, either spouse may use that fact as a ground to seek divorce under Section 13(1A) of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Is Restitution of Conjugal Rights still valid in India in 2026? Yes. RCR remains legally valid and enforceable. The Supreme Court upheld its constitutional validity in Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar Chadha. However, its constitutional validity is currently under fresh challenge before the Supreme Court in a pending case.
Expert Divorce Lawyers – Immediate Legal Help Available Get clear legal advice, fast support, and complete confidentiality for your case.
📞 Call: +91 9560020498
🌐 Visit: matrimonialadvocates.com
Introduction and Background Although cherished in our heart as a “Paradise on Earth”, the history of this beautiful land is attached with
The case Anuradha Bhasin vs Union of India is a landmark Supreme Court judgment concerning internet shutdowns and freedom of speech in Jammu & Kashmir after the abrogation of Article 370. The Court held that freedom of speech and trade through the internet enjoys constitutional protection under Article 19 and emphasized that restrictions must satisfy legality, necessity, proportionality, and judicial review standards.
A shocking Delhi private bus gang rape case has sparked nationwide concern over women safety and public transport security. Read complete legal analysis, police investigation details, and applicable criminal laws on Pavan Law Chambers.
A shocking incident in Delhi where a woman alleged gang rape inside a private bus. Police arrested two accused and launched investigation.
