The moment marriage is solemnised certain rights and liabilities accrue to both the spouses. They are bound to fulfill their respective parts and any deviance from the same results in the invoking of legal provisions for their enforcement. One of the most important incidences of marriage is the “right to have company of the other spouse”. Thus, if a spouse unreasonably withdraws himself/ herself the other spouse can ask for the “restitution of the conjugal rights” by approaching the court. The burden of proof that withdrawal from the society is reasonable is on that spouse who withdraws from the society and refuses to discharge his/her marital obligations. If the husband or wife refuses to discharge their matrimonial obligations, they have to lead strong evidence in support of their refusal to discharge their obligation. The refusal to discharge obligations can be said to be reasonable or justified only when it is impossible for one of them to live with the other . As far as the defence for such a proceeding is concerned, a ground for divorce can be used for showing reasonableness of the refusal to cohabit. For instance, cruelty is a ground of divorce and the same can also be offered as a defence in a suit for restitution of conjugal rights .

Thus, the rights and liabilities originating out of a marriage are not only sacramental in nature but they are equally legal by character. It cannot be contended that the State should enforce them by invoking their enforcement power. The matrimonial relationships are, no doubt, personal in nature but a harmony and decent behaviour has been ensured by the law on the part of both spouses. The best part about this process is that it is not based on the absurd divide of patriarchy and feminism and is uniformly applied with equal force.