The HC said that law stipulates that a decree of restitution of conjugal rights cannot compel couples to live together by force
The husband immediately challenged the family court order involving the police on the grounds that Order 21, Rule 32 of the Civil Procedure Code has provisions for execution of decree in restitution of conjugal rights, but it envisages attachment of property in a case of disobedience by the spouse, and its enforcement is not contemplated by police personnel. Because the law stipulates that a decree of restitution of conjugal rights cannot be enforced by the involvement of police or courts and cannot compel couples to live together by force, this is. Ahmedabad: Gujarat High Court has stayed a family court decree directing a husband to resume cohabitation with his wife after he took exception to an order that asked police to escort the woman to her husband’s home in Rajkot. The husband appealed in the HC against the family court’s order through advocate Dharmesh Patel. the wife filed another application in the family court seeking the execution of the decree and sought police protection While the appeal was pending. Acting on her application, the family court passed an order and directed a police inspector of the jurisdiction concerned in Rajkot to take the woman to her husband’s house and ensure that she enters her matrimonial home. Advocate Patel insisted on staying the decree itself.
Court Orders Husband to Reunite with Wife in Family Dispute
In a recent family court ruling in Modasa, Aravali district, the court has directed a husband to reinstate his wife within 30 days. This decision follows the wife’s legal action under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which allows a spouse to seek restitution of conjugal rights.
The wife, an anganwadi worker, initiated the suit to affirm her rights after a period of separation. The court’s decree, issued in January 2025, underscores the legal mechanisms available to spouses in India to address marital disputes and seek reconciliation.
The couple in this case got married in 2008 and have a son. They have been living separately for the last 16 years. Therefore, ad-interim-relief in terms of Para-11(B) is granted till final disposal of the appeal.”
The husband, a lecturer in a Rajkot college, filed for divorce in a court in his native Simalwara in Rajasthan. On hearing him, the bench of Justice Ilesh Vora and Justice R T Vachhani passed an order and stated, “In such circumstances, a case is made out for granting ad-interim relief as prayed for.