Can a married woman be compelled to live in a married life with her husband? This is the big question before us. The Supreme Court has termed the petition as important, challenging the legal provision to restore married life. And under the Special Marriage Act, there is a right to restore married life and to restore sahjeevan (sexual relationship). Describing the petition challenging this provision as important, the Supreme Court has asked the Central Government to file a reply within 10 days. Important legal question: Before a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, the central government has sought two weeks’ time to file a reply in this matter. The Supreme Court has asked the Central Government to present its affidavit on the petition challenging the provision related to the restoration of married life. During the hearing, the Attorney General said that time should be given for written reply in this matter. The Attorney General has been asked by the court to cooperate in this matter. During the hearing, the petitioner’s lawyer Indira Jaising said that this matter is purely a legal question. During the hearing in a three-judge bench headed by Justice Rohinton Nariman of the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court told the Additional Solicitor General, appearing for the Central Government, that the petition challenging the provision related to restoration of married life is on an important subject, you answer . Then the Additional Solicitor General said that we will file an affidavit in this matter in a week. The Supreme Court has fixed July 22 for hearing. Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been challenged by filing an application in the Supreme Court, which provides for the restoration of married life. Along with this, Section-22 of the Special Marriage Act has been challenged, in which this provision is there. The Supreme Court will examine this important question. The petitioner has challenged the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act and the Special Marriage Act by filing the application, which states that this is a violation of the right of the owner. It has been said in the petition that no one can be forced to live with anyone. The Supreme Court had issued notice to the central government two years ago on a petition filed in the case and the matter was referred to a three-judge bench. Along with this, the Attorney General was also asked to cooperate in the matter. The matter came up for hearing on Thursday before a three-judge bench. The petitioner said that the provision violates the right to privacy, the petitioner has challenged the constitutional validity of Section-9 of the Hindu Marriage Act and Section-22 of the Special Marriage Act. Both these sections have the right to restore married life. In the application filed in the Supreme Court, it has been said that the right to life also includes the right to privacy. This provision violates someone’s sexual autonomy. This provision violates the right to live life with dignity and with privacy. It is like a kind of punitive action by the state. The provision of restoration of married life has been challenged by filing an application on behalf of two students of Gujarat National Law University. The application referred to the decision of the 9-judge Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court in which the right to privacy is considered a fundamental right. It was also said that under the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act and the Special Marriage Act, a woman is compelled to restore symbiosis with her husband. There are two important components of married life, symbiosis and physical relationship. Under the existing provision, it may be compelled that married life be restored. Any man or woman can take action against the other after being ordered to restore married life. What is provision? According to Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, if the husband or wife is living separately without any valid reason, then the other party can approach the court for restoration of married life. If the court is satisfied with the plea of the petitioner and it is found about the other party that he is living separately without any valid reason, then the court can pass an order to live together i.e. to maintain the married life. . This provision is also there in Section-22 of the Special Marriage Act. The petitioner has urged that the provision of section-9 of Hindu Marriage Act and section-22 of Special Marriage Act be set aside. It has also been said that the orders and rules of the CPC implementing this provision should also be set aside. The petitioner has said that the said provision violates the fundamental right and this provision has been taken from English law and the wife is being treated as a jagir. According to Article 15 of the Constitution, all are equal before the law. But the right to restore married life in a way reinforces the patriarchal principle, treats the woman as a jagir and these provisions violate Articles 15 and 21.
[Attribution to NBT]