According to the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Section 9) If either the husband or the wife, without any reasonable excuses, withdraws from the society of the other, the aggrieved party can approach the Court for restitution of conjugal rights. Section 9 is to save marriage.
The term Conjugal Rights could be placed against any of the spouses guilty of staying away from the other party without a proper reason. If the suit succeeds then the couple would be needed to stay together. The decree of restitution of conjugal rights cannot be actioned by forcefully making the party who has gone away from the society from the other party to live with the one who sets petition for restitution.
The petitioner has to satisfy to the Court that the other party has without any reasonable excuse withdrawn from his or her society. So, if a persom's wife has without any reasonable excuse withdrawn from his society, he may file petition before the District Judge for such a relief. When he files such a petition, Court has to satisfied that the husband has a bona fide desire to bring his spouse to your company. If the Court finds that a husband's own conduct debars him from seeking this relief of the company of his spouse or a fact shows that a husband is taking advantage of his own wrong, Court shall dismiss his petition.
There has been conflicting views from different high courts about the Restitution of conjugal rights wether a husband in whose favour the Restitution of conjugal rights is granted is liable for maintenance of his wife under section 125 of the crpc. In one landmark judgment which deals with this issue by haryana court Ravi kumar V. Santosh kumari,1997 it was held that :-
If the decision of the court is against the wife and in favour of husband,the wife has no right to claim for maintenance under section 25 of the crpc in the civil courts.
A special issue has been framed,if the wife is not able to give sufficient valid reasons for her staying away from the husband and the parties have been given sufficient opportunity to prove the evidences and the specific findings are recorded by the civil courts.
Secondly, in case some cases where the husband has got ex parte decree of Restitution of conjugal rights from the civil court such decree cannot be binding on the criminal courts in exercise of it's jurisdiction unders section 125 of CRPC.
And in case the decree of Restitution of conjugal rights has been obtained by the husband subsequently to the order passed for the maintenance by the magistrate,this shall not dientitle wife from being granted the rights of maintenance under section 125 of the crpc. The wife according to our first conclusion can be granted maintenance from the date of divorce and the maintenance will be granted till she re-marries.
In another remarkable case given by the andhra pradesh high court,in Maddina subbamma V. Maddina venkateswarlu ,1993 it was held that a decree for Restitution of conjugal rights is not an absolute bar to the consideration of petition unders section 125 of crpc. Referring to certain rulings given by the different high coutts,it was held that the wife can claim maintenance and the maintenance shall be granted to her.