Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sarjeet Singh vs Smt. Sakshi Kourav on 5 February, 2024
Author: Rohit Arya
Bench: Rohit Arya
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT G WA L I O R
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ROHIT ARYA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BINOD KUMAR DWIVEDI
FIRST APPEAL No. 201 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
SARJEET SINGH S/O SHRI HAKIM SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
GOVT. NOKRI R/O GRAM TETON THASIL
GOHAD P.S ENDORI BHIND AT PRE. NEW
POLICE COLONY 14/2 SATNA P.S CIVIL LINE
SATANA TAHSIL RAGHURAJ NAGAR DISTT.
SATNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....Appellant
(SHRI J.S.RATHORE-ADVOCATE)
AND
SMT. SAKSHI KOURAV W/O SHRI
SARJEET SINGH KOURAV, AGED ABOUT
24 YEARS, R/O GRAM TETON TAHSIL
GOHAD P.S ENDORI BHIND AT PRE.
GRAM DHOD POST PANDOKHAR TAHSIL
BHANDER DISTT. DATIA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT
(SHRI AMIT RAWAT- ADVOCATE)
Signature Not Verified --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Signed by: MADHU Reserved on : 30.1.2024
SOODAN PRASAD
Signing time: 06-02-2024 Pronounced on : 05.2.2024
10:51:04 AM
2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This First Appeal having been heard and reserved for
judgment, coming on for pronouncement this day, Hon'ble Shri
Justice Binod Kumar Dwivedi pronounced the following :
JUDGMENT
The subject matter of this first appeal filed by the
appellant/husband under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act,
1984 is judgment and decree dated 24.11.2022 passed by the
Principal Judge, Family Court, Datia, in Case No.31 of 2019 RCS
HMA, whereby the petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage
Act, 1955 (for short hereinafter shall be referred as "the Act") filed
by the respondent/wife has been decreed.
2. It is undisputed that appellant/husband and respondent/wife
are married couple. Their marriage was solemnized as per Hindu
traditions/customs on 4.12.2017. It is also undisputed that
appellant/husband is Constable in M.P. Police and posted at Satna.
It is also undisputed that appellant/husband has filed a petition
under Section 13 of the Act before the Family Court, Satna on
18.12.2018 which has been registered as HMA No.12 of 2018. It is
also undisputed that on the petition of appellant/husband
proceedings of conciliation were drawn before the Parivar
Paramarsh Kendra, Satna.
respondent/wife are that her parents solemnized her marriage with
the appellant by giving dowry of Rs.11 lacs in cash, jewellery of
Rs.5 lacs and other goods for domestic use. From the very
beginning, the appellant was not satisfied with the dowry given
and demanded a four-wheeler from her parents and started
harassing her on non-fulfillment of the demand. On her complaint
to her parents, she was advised to live in her matrimonial house
and follow duties of a wife which will improve the behaviour of
the appellant in course of time.
3.1 Thereafter when she reached her matrimonial house, the
appellant and his relatives reiterating their demand of dowry
started harassing her by beating and hurling filthy abuses. They
also administered her some drugs just to make her mad. Despite all
this, she fulfilled the duties of wife in the matrimonial house. For
the third time when she reached matrimonial house, the appellant
took her to Satna where he was posted and treated her with cruelty
and again administered some sedative drugs just to make her mad
and also attempted to set her ablaze by pouring kerosene oil on her
on the allegation that she has illicit relations with some other
person.
3.2 She has further stated that the appellant/husband after
keeping her at Satna for some time, left her in matrimonial house
at village Taton where she was ill-treated by the relatives of the
husband. On 27th January, 2019 respondent/husband and his
since then she is residing at village Dhaud, Distt. Datia with her
parents. The appellant/husband has withdrawn him from her
society without sufficient reasons and deprived her of
cohabitation. She is ready to live with her husband and to perform
duties of a wife. On refusal by the appellant to keep her as wife,
her parents convened a Panchayat consisting of relatives and
respected members of the society but appellant/husband clearly
refused to keep her with him, therefore, she has filed a petition
under Section 9 of the Act for restitution of conjugal rights.
3.3 The appellant/husband in his written statement specifically
stated that respondent/wife is in love with some other person. She
revealed this fact on the very first day when she reached to her
matrimonial house and refused to live and cohabit with him. When
for the second time, she came to her matrimonial house, she
started quarreling and abusing his family members. On mobile
phone, she was off and on found secretly talking to some unknown
person and on his objection, she was threatening to commit
suicide. The appellant took her to Satna where he was posted
thinking that everything will be set right in the course of time.
Her mother (mother-in-law of appellant) also came there to live
with them. In presence of her mother, she tried to strangulate him
and when her mother tried to placate her, she threatened to commit
suicide and with the blade cut her hand and took overdose of
medicines, therefore, for treatment she was admitted by the
SOODAN PRASAD him to have sexual intercourse with her alleging publicly that he is
impotent. On the day of Raksha Bandhan she getting angry
without any reason damaged the house-hold goods and opened gas
cylinder, therefore, the appellant was constrained to call police
which caused very much embarrassment to him.
3.4 The respondent was keeping herself engaged on mobile
phone with some person. On recording, it was revealed that the
respondent had secretly married with Mahendra Pratap Singh three
years before her marriage with the appellant. She was trying to
live with Mahendra Pratap Singh. The recording to that effect has
been submitted before the Family Court, Satna in the case filed by
the appellant under Section 13 of the Act. The respondent herself
before the Panchayat has openly stated that she did not want to
live with the appellant.
3.5 The appellant has further stated that on 4.11.2018 without
informing him she fled away to her parental house along with cash
and gold jewellery, whereafter he has filed a petition under Section
13 of the Act before the Family Court Satna. When she was served
with a notice of that case on 28.1.2019, just to create a defence she
has filed this petition under Section 9 of the Act on 14.2.2019. In
the marriage, the respondent's parents provided Rs. 2 lacs which
have been deposited in FDR in the name of respondent itself.
Since respondent had already married with Mahendra Pratap
Singh, therefore, her marriage with the appellant is null and void.
appeared on 30.10.2018 and accepted her faults stating that she
wants to mend her ways, but she has done all this just to create
confusion. Since respondent herself went away to her parental
house, therefore, she did not appear on fixed date 10.11.2018
before the Parivar Paramarsh Kendra which in itself falsifies her
allegation that she was left in her parental house by the appellant
on 27.1.2019 because on that day, she was not in Satna.
3.7 On the pleadings of the parties, issues were framed and on
due appreciation of the evidence oral and documentary adduced by
both the parties, the learned Family Court came to the conclusion
that the appellant/husband has withdrawn himself from the society
of respondent/wife without sufficient reason, and therefore,
decreed the petition under Section 9 of the Act in favour of the
respondent/wife for restitution of conjugal rights.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant/husband taking exception
to the judgment and decree passed by the learned Family Court
submits that it is not based on due appreciation of evidence on
record. The appellant/husband has sufficient reasons to live away
from the respondent. The allegations with regard to demand of
dowry and treating the respondent with cruelty by the appellant
are false. Neither any FIR has been lodged by the respondent/wife
in this regard, nor convening of Panchayat of respected members
of the society and relatives has been proved. The respondent/wife
herself has deserted him and meted out appellant/husband with
commit suicide. She herself fled away from the residence of the
appellant on 4.11.2018 along with cash and jewellery and since
then she without any reason is residing with her parents. She has
levelled false allegations against the appellant and members of his
family for treating her with cruelty. She has never allowed the
appellant to have sexual intercourse with her which is cruelty in
itself against the appellant. The learned Family Court ignoring the
evidence adduced by the appellant has decreed the suit of the
respondent which is bad in law. Therefore, the decree may be set
aside.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent/wife submits that even
after offering dowry of Rs.11 lacs in cash, jewellery of Rs. 5 lacs
and other household goods, the appellant and members of his
family just after marriage started harassing the respondent for
demand of a four-wheeler. She was subjected to cruelty. She by
her behaviour never humiliated the appellant or members of his
family. False allegations have been levelled against her. She was
not allowed to live with her husband/appellant, therefore, she filed
this petition under Section 9 of the Act. The Family Court after
due appreciation of evidence adduced by both the sides has
decreed the petition which is based on due appreciation of
evidence and does not call for any interference in this appeal,
therefore, appeal may be dismissed.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused
7. Conjugal rights are the rights accompanied by the persons,
who are married. When it comes to the recovery of marital rights,
there are a few basic aspects to consider. Neither the husband nor
the wife should be able to take away the other's rights without
good reason.
7.1 Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act which deals with
restitution of conjugal rights reads as under :-
"9. Restitution of conjugal rights- 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."
[ Explanation :- Where a question arises whether
there has been reasonable excuse for withdrawal
from the society, the burden of proving reasonable
excuse shall be on the person who has withdrawn
from the society.]
7.2 The purpose of section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is
to maintain the sacrifice aspect of marriage by eliminating
disparities that arise between spouses. This can be accomplished
by granting section 9 relief of restitution of marital rights. This
remedy of restitution of conjugal rights is a beneficial privilege
because it allows deserted spouses to be together and cohabit.
section deals with the restitution of conjugal rights. It states that if
one spouse has withdrawn from the society of the other without
any reasonable excuse, the aggrieved party can file a petition in
competent court for the restitution of conjugal rights. The court, if
satisfied that there is no legal ground for the withdrawal and that
the petitioner is not in any way at fault, may pass a decree for the
restitution of conjugal rights, which would require the other
spouse to return to the matrimonial home and resume cohabitation.
The concept of restitution of conjugal rights in India has its origins
in the traditional Hindu law, which recognized the importance of
maintaining the sanctity of marriage and preserving the unity of
the family.
7.3 Under traditional Hindu law, a wife was obligated to live
with her husband and perform her duties as a wife, and if she
refused to do so without any just cause, the husband could seek a
judicial separation. The concept was codified in the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 which was one of the first legislation in India
to provide for the restitution of conjugal rights. The provision in
Section 9 of the Act allows a spouse to seek a court order
requiring the other spouse to resume cohabitation and fulfill their
marital obligations.
7.4 From bare perusal of Section 9 of the Act, it is amply clear
that when either the husband or wife has, without reasonable
excuse, withdrawn from the society of the other, on being satisfied
there is no legal ground for not granting application, the Court
may pass the decree of restitution of conjugal right. From the
explanation attached to the Section, it is also very much clear that
when question arises as to whether there has been reasonable
excuse for withdrawal from the society of the spouse, the burden
of proving reasonable excuse shall be on the person who has
withdrawn from the society of the other spouse.
7.5 In the light of above context, now it is to be seen whether
the decree passed in favour of the respondent needs any
interference by way of this appeal in factual context of the case in
hand.
7.6 Since in this case, as per the allegations in the petition filed
by the respondent/wife, the appellant himself has withdrawn him
from the society of respondent/wife, therefore, the burden of
proving that there is reasonable excuse for his such act is on the
appellant as per explanation attached to Section 9 of the Act.
7.7. To substantiate the ground for not living in the company of
respondent/wife, the appellant has only examined himself before
the Family Court. He has stated that just after marriage on
4.12.2017, the respondent/wife revealed that she was not willing
to marry him, but under the pressure of her family members she
married him. On the very first night of marriage, she broke away
Mangalsutra, ring and damaged household items kept in the room.
He has further stated that after marriage he along with
visit Vaishno Devi. While returning, they stayed in a hotel where
respondent/wife hurled abuses on him and said that she wanted to
live with her boyfriend. On the very same night, she contacted her
brother on mobile phone and her brother on phone abused his
sister Shimla Kaurav.
7.8. On return to Satna where he was posted, the respondent on
the pretext of ill-health used to shirk from doing house-hold
chores and kept her busy on mobile phone. When he objected and
tried to snatch the mobile phone, respondent threatened to commit
suicide. She used to hurl abuses on him and his family members.
Therefore, appellant called his mother-in-law (mother of the wife)
to Satna. In the presence of her mother, she at once swallowed 13
pills of medicines (overdose) prescribed by the doctor for her
treatment. On deterioration of her health, she was admitted by him
to Birla Hospital, Satna, where she remained admitted for five
days. She tried to commit suicide by hanging and cutting her wrist
stating that she did not want to live with him, as she wanted to live
with someone else.
7.9. Appellant has further stated that in between 18 th October to
20th October, 2018 at about 2 pm when he came back to his
residence, the respondent was having conversation on mobile
phone with some unknown person and when he asked her as to
why she has neither done any house-hold job nor cooked food till
that time and when he snatched her mobile phone, she again
get lodged him in jail. During that night, she also tried to
strangulate the appellant. She also damaged TV, Home Theater
and other goods with curtain rod.
7.10. He has further stated that when he could not bear with the
ill-treatment of the respondent, he filed an application before the
Superintendent of Police, Satna, from where two Head Constables
and one lady Constable came to assuage her. In presence of the
above police personnel, the respondent cut her wrist with knife
and by opening gas cylinder, tried to set the residence ablaze.
When respondent contacted his father on mobile phone, he told
him (appellant) "he should do whatever he likes, ultimately he will
have to go to jail with members of his family."
7.11. The appellant has further stated that on the next day when
he returned from his duty, respondent was not opening the door, on
which he called police by dialing 100. When the police party
knocked the window from backside, the respondent opened the
door. After giving advice, police party went away. When he was
having conversation with his friend Omprakash Tiwari and the
respondent, he checked mobile phone of the respondent and found
a call recording in which there was some reference of Mahendra
Pratap Singh @ Munim Patel. From that recording, he came to
know that respondent had secretly performed marriage with
Mahendra Pratap Singh three years before marrying him.
7.12. The appellant has filed proceedings (Ex.D/1) drawn before
substantiate his version that respondent/wife has admitted her
faults and assured to mend her ways. Before Parivar Parmarsh
Kendra 10th November, 2018 was fixed for appearance of the
parties, but respondent did not turn up on that date and on enquiry
by the In-charge of the Paramarsh Kendra, the respondent/wife
informed that on 4th November, 2018 she has come to her parental
house with his brother. Thereafter he has filed a petition under
Section 13 of the Act for divorce. On service of notice (Ex.D/4)
issued in that family case, to create defence, respondent has filed
this petition under Section 9 of the Act.
7.13. All the allegations have been refuted by the respondent/wife
in her cross-examination. Appellant has not examined any of his
neighbourer living at Satna to support his version regarding
misbehaviour by the respondent/wife. Clipping allegedly
containing version which discloses that respondent/wife has
performed marriage with some Mahendra Pratap Singh has also
not been filed in this case before the Family Court. Even after all
these instances of misbehaviour of respondent/wife, no evidence
has been adduced that the appellant has ever tried to convene any
meeting of members of family relations or society to settle the
dispute. The appellant has also not produced any documentary
evidence to show that the respondent had fallen ill by taking
overdose of the medicines in attempt to commit suicide or she has
cut her wrist. As per the appellant he has admitted the respondent
SOODAN PRASAD that hospital, which might have been the best evidence to prove
the case of the appellant. No cogent evidence except bald
allegations has been adduced by the appellant/husband to prove
that he has reasonable excuse for withdrawing himself from the
society of respondent/wife.
7.14. Learned Family Court vide impugned judgment para 16 to
30 has extensively dealt with the evidence adduced by the parties
and reached to the conclusion that appellant/husband without any
sufficient reason has withdrawn himself from the society of the
respondent/wife. In the considered opinion of this Court, the
above findings are based on due appreciation of evidence
available on record. We give our stamp of approval to the above
findings because no perversity, illegality or misinterpretation of
the evidence available on record could be pointed out by the
appellant/husband.
7.15. From the aforesaid discussion, this Court finds no ground
to interfere in the judgment & decree for restitution of conjugal
rights passed by the Family Court. The appeal being devoid of
substance deserves dismissal and is hereby dismissed.
Parties shall bear their own costs.
(Rohit Arya) (Binod Kumar Dwivedi)
Judge Judge
ms/-
