SC terms important pleas seeking striking down of provisions on conjugal rights

New Delhi: The Supreme Court Thursday termed important" the pleas challenging Constitutional validity of the matrimonial law provisions which empower courts to ask estranged spouses to "cohabit" and "take part in sexual intercourse" to restore conjugal rights and asked the Centre to file its response within 10 days.

A bench of Justices R F Nariman, K M Joseph and B R Gavai listed the pleas for further hearing on July 22 and allowed various intervention applications. During the brief hearing, Attorney General K KVenugopal, whose assistance was sought by the court in the matter, said he needed time to file written submissions.

Senior advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for the petitioners, said the matter deals with a pure question of law with regard to the validity of section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA) and other related provisions and hence the court should give a shorter date.

The bench said it will take up the matter after two weeks.

Advocate ShoebAlam, appearing for interveners, said that not only the matrimonial laws but certain other provisions under the IPC and other laws need to be dealt with while examining the validity of provisions empowering courts to ask estranged spouses to "cohabit" and restore conjugal rights.

The bench said that it will list all the intervention applications together with the main matter and would hear them on July 22. The top court was hearing pleas including one filed by Ojaswa Pathak and Mayank Gupta, the students of Gujarat National Law University at Gandhinagar, who have challenged the validity of section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA), Section 22 of the Special Marriage Act (SMA) and certain provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).

These provisions empower courts to pass a decree of restitution of conjugal rights to an estranged couple. On January 14 last year, the top court had sought assistance of the Attorney General in the matter.

On March 5, 2019, the top court had referred to a three-judge bench a plea challenging the Constitutional validity of provisions in the matrimonial laws empowering courts to ask estranged spouses to "cohabit".

The plea has referred to the nine-judge verdict that held privacy as one of the fundamental rights and assailed the legal provisions of the HMA and the SMA, saying that they force mostly unwilling women to cohabit with their estranged husbands.