oppn parties Exception 2 Of Section 375 Should Be Read Down

News Snippets

  • Supreme Court rules that functional disability should be the deciding factor in granting road accident damages and not any doctor-issued disability certificate
  • Supreme Court flagged the fact that nearly 56% of the vehicles plying in India were uninsured and asked the government to challan them
  • An Air India flight from Phuket to Delhi encountered severe turbulence and 17 passengers were admitted to hospital with injuries
  • Calcutta HC said that heavens won't fall if Vande Matram is made mandatory to sing in madrasas
  • Kolkata Municipal Corporation has sought government nod for increasing city's wards to 200+ to keep residents in each ward between 16000 to 18000
  • Government has said that partially filled online Census forms may be allowed
  • Government may allow fees on UPI payments above Rs 2000, except on transfer between two individuals
  • Brent crude falls below $80 per barrel
  • Government has increased the LIC offer for sale to Rs 31,400cr with an additional 4% on the block
  • Stock markets become nervous on Tuesday due to Gulf situation: Sensex slides 210 points and Nifty sheds 159 points ahead of RBI MPC meets today
  • Indian cricket team lands in Sri Lanka for a 2-Test series
  • A former French Navy pilot who had alleged that IAF had lost Rafales during Operation Sindoor has been held in France on spying charges
  • An ordinary zari worked living just 100km away from Kolkata was stunned to find Rs 100cr deposited in the bank account. The bank has frozen her account pending enquiry
  • Businessmen in Kolkata gets a Rs 5-crore extortion call, allegedly from the Lawrence Bishnoi gang
  • NTA floats tenders to secure offices and exam materials round-the-clock
Tarun Tejpal, former editor of Tehelka, was sentenced to 10 years in jail by Bombay HC for raping a colleague. This judgment overturns the acquittal by a Goa sessions court
oppn parties
Exception 2 Of Section 375 Should Be Read Down

By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2021-08-28 07:31:31

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Author of Cyber Scams in India, Digital Arrest, The Money Trap and The Human Hack

A refusal to have sex is still a no even if the woman is saying it to her husband. If a woman says no to sex, it means that at that point of time she does not want to have sex with the person who is demanding it. If the act is still performed despite her refusal, it is rape. But Indian laws have granted the husband an exception. In Section 375, under Exception 2, it is not considered rape if a husband forces himself on his unwilling wife. In that sense, the order of the Chhattisgarh High Court discharging a man accused of sexual assault on his wife cannot be faulted as the judge went strictly by the book.

Indian laws are in conflict over the issue. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 defines domestic violence as including, among other things, sexual abuse which it defines as, 'any conduct of a sexual nature that abuses, humiliates, degrades or otherwise violates the dignity of woman'. The definition here does not specify the acts that constitute sexual abuse. On the other hand, Section 375 exception 2 grants immunity to a husband from any crime if he has forced sex with his wife. Both these laws are contradictory because forced sex by a husband can be said to be a 'conduct of a sexual nature that abuses, humiliates, degrades or violates the dignity of a woman'.

But has not the time come to do away with this provision that 'legalizes' rape in marriage and which originated in Victorian times? While it was never acceptable to give ownership rights to a husband over his wife and her body, perhaps those were times when such things were not considered improper. But now times have changed. The relationship between a husband and his wife is now more equal than ever before. Although sex is an integral part of marriage, it has to be recognized that it is not something that can be done at the push of a button. If, for any reason whatsoever, the wife is unwilling, the husband has no right to force himself on her, irrespective of what the law says.

Recently, the Kerala High Court has held that forced sex in marriage is a ground for divorce as it amount to cruelty. It said that "right to respect for his or her physical and mental integrity encompass bodily integrity, any disrespect or violation of bodily integrity is a violation of individual autonomy."  The court also said that if the husband treats her body as something owned by him and commits the sexual act against her will, it should be considered marital rape. If something is considered cruel, how can it continue to be legal? The Supreme Court should read down the exception in Section 375 as it is not in consonance with the meaning of marriage in the present times and never was.