oppn parties Exception 2 Of Section 375 Should Be Read Down

News Snippets

  • Allahabad HC said that the UP Police is acting as law unto themselves as they detained a person unlawfully even before his arrest
  • Kolkata witnesses traffic snarls on the first day of the Durga Puja festival as revellers start pnadal-hopping
  • Neha Bora was subsequently released and Dipke is to appear before a magistrate today at noon
  • Delhi Police detained Cockroach Janta Party founder Abhijeet Dipke, Neha Bora of AISA, student leaders and supporters ahead of a rally in Connaught Place demanding Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar's resignation. The protest followed the detention and jailing of two CJP leaders earlier in the week over demonstrations at Jantar Mantar
  • The Reserve Bank of India is considering further monetary tightening to counter capital outflows and increase the cost of betting against the rupee, according to bankers and analysts cited by Reuters. The measures follow recent rate increases and steps to drain liquidity as pressure on the currency and inflation concerns persist
  • India directed oil marketing companies to stop diverting sugar-based feedstocks for ethanol production in the 2026–27 supply year, according to a new tender issued on Friday. The companies have invited bids for 11 billion litres of ethanol made from alternatives including corn and broken rice, amid concerns about domestic sugar supplies and prices
  • Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman said India's trade imbalance with China was growing sharply and attributed the problem partly to restrictions on Indian goods and services entering the Chinese market. China subsequently said it was ready to work with India to address mutual economic and trade concerns; India's trade deficit with China reached $69 billion in the first half of FY2026–27, up 27% year-on-year
  • Indian equity benchmarks extended their recovery on Friday, with the Sensex rising 413.66 points to close at 74,729.27 and the Nifty 50 gaining 148.80 points to settle at 23,146.15. Information technology shares, including Tech Mahindra, Infosys and TCS, helped lift the indices
  • India defeated Zimbabwe by four wickets in the opening women's T20 International in Raipur, taking a 1–0 lead in the three-match series. Deepti Sharma and Niki Prasad combined in an 82-run stand after India's top order collapsed, helping the hosts chase down Zimbabwe's total of 114 for five
  • Indian wrestler Komal won bronze in the women's 59 kg category at the Under-23 World Wrestling Championships in Las Vegas, defeating Kazakhstan's Viktoriia Khusainova 7–2. Fellow Indian Amruta Pujari advanced to the women's 72 kg final after recording two pinfall victories
  • Indian shuttler Jagsher Singh Khangurra secured a bronze medal at the BWF World Junior Badminton Championships in Cairo
  • The Supreme Court of India upheld the Bombay High Court's decision quashing the 2020 write-off of ₹8,415 crore in additional tier-1 bonds issued by Yes Bank (Yes Bank). The court ruled that the bank's administrator lacked the authority to extinguish the bonds under the final reconstruction scheme, strengthening bondholders' claims
  • The Supreme Court issued notices to the Election Commission of India, Delhi Police and opposition leaders, including Rahul Gandhi and Akhilesh Yadav, in separate petitions concerning electoral-roll revision and protests held in Delhi on October 10–12. The court also directed the preservation of CCTV footage linked to allegations of police excesses
  • The Supreme Court ruled that a person converting from Hinduism to Islam cannot automatically claim backward-class reservation benefits in the new religious community solely on the basis of their previous caste status. The judgment upheld the Madras High Court's decision striking down a 2024 Tamil Nadu government order that permitted such certification for specified communities
  • The Election Commission of India ordered a Special Summary Revision of electoral rolls in 14 states and three Union Territories, using January 1, 2027, as the qualifying date for voter eligibility. The draft rolls are scheduled for publication on November 12, claims and objections will be accepted until December 11, and the final rolls are due on January 4, 2027
Delhi HC refuses to ban CJP's Tiranga rally at Central Park in Connaught Place today /////// Police says will control and regulate it /////// NDMC closes the park for the public on Friday and Saturday
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.