IMPORTANT POINT
Restitution of conjugal rights – If photographs are available, they require a non-biased approach for their consideration.

JUDGMENT (CAV)

Arun Kumar Jha, J.—The instant Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 against judgment and decree dated 04.11.2015 and 21.11.2015, respectively, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhagalpur in Matrimonial Case No. 81 of 2009.

Factual Aspects of the matter:—

2. The conspectus of case of the parties is that the respondent filed Matrimonial Case No. 81 of 2009 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short ‘HMA’) against the appellant/opposite party seeking restitution of conjugal rights against the appellant directing him to discharge his marital obligations towards the respondent. For the sake of convenience, we will be using nomenclature as used in the present appeal for further reference. From the petition of the respondent before the learned Family Court, it appears that she had been living in Bhagalpur and working in LIC in one of its Branches at Bhagalpur. The appellant solemnized marriage with the respondent on 9th November, 2003 according to Hindu Rites and Customs at Bhagalpur. Both appellant and respondent used to work in LIC and they were posted at LIC Office, District-Sahebganj, Jharkhand in the year 2003 after joining the organization. Both of them were residing at Bhagalpur and they were accustomed to commute monthly by train together and also by motorcycle. The close association resulted in special affinity between them and it culminated in love. The appellant and respondent decided to solemnize marriage without any interference or intervention of their family members since they belonged to different castes and accordingly the marriage was solemnized at the residence of the petitioner/respondent in presence of close relatives including sister and brother-in-law (Didi and Jija Ji) of the respondent as she has been residing in a rented house at Adampur, Bhagalpur. The marriage was solemnized by a Pandit, namely Pankaj Kumar Jha. The appellant and the respondent started leading their conjugal life peacefully for about 02 years but when the fact came to the knowledge of the parents of the appellant, they got enraged. They started pressurizing the appellant to solemnize marriage with another lady of same caste with handsome dowry. Tempted by the allurement of money and instigated by his mother, the appellant started demanding Rs. 10,00,000/- from the respondent and on non fulfillment of this demand, the appellant started maintaining some distance from the respondent and later on solemnized marriage with another woman after taking dowry. Coming to know about the second marriage of the appellant, the respondent went to the native place of the appellant but the respondent was abused and threatened by the family members of the appellant. Due to continuous demand of dowry, the respondent got instituted an FIR against the appellant and his mother for offence under Section 498A of IPC and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Subsequently, several litigation started due to adamant attitude of the appellant and his family members. The respondent continued her parleys with the appellant and his mother directly or through other persons persuading them to allow the respondent to live with the appellant. The respondent submitted that the cause of action arose on 05.04.2006, when the appellant refused to lead conjugal life with the respondent after his second marriage and thereafter, the respondent filed the petition before the learned Family Court for restitution of conjugal rights. The respondent further submitted that marriage of the respondent with appellant was a valid marriage and she has got right of restitution of conjugal rights and she was ready to live with the appellant as his wife to lead married conjugal life. Thus, the respondent prayed for passing a decree for restitution of conjugal right against the appellant, directing him to discharge his marital obligation with the respondent petitioner.

3. The appellant joined the tria