oppn parties Marital Rape: A Split Verdict From Delhi HC

News Snippets

  • UP government removed Lokesh M as CEO of Noida Authority and formed a SIT to inquire into the death of techie Yuvraj Mehta who drowned after his car fell into a waterlogged trench at a commercial site
  • Nitin Nabin elected BJP President unopposed, will take over today
  • Supreme Court rules that abusive language against SC/ST persons cannot be construed an offence under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
  • Orissa HC dismissed the pension cliams of 2nd wife citing monogamy in Hindu law
  • Delhi HC quashed the I-T notices to NDTV founders and directed the department to pay ₹ 2 lakh to them for 'harassment'
  • Bangladesh allows Chinese envoy to go near Chicken's Nest, ostensibly to see the Teesta project
  • Kishtwar encounter: Special forces jawan killed, 7 others injured in a faceoff with terrorists
  • PM Modi, in a special gesture, receives UAE President Md Bin Zayed Al Nahyan at the airport. India, UAE will boost strategic defence ties
  • EAM S Jaishankar tells Poland to stop backing Pak-backed terror in India. Also, Polish minister walks off a talk show when questioned on cross-border terrorism
  • Indigo likely to cut more flights after Feb 10 when the new flight rules kick in for it
  • Supreme Court asks EC to publish the names of all voters with 'logical discrepency' in th Bengal SIR
  • ICC has asked Bangladesh to decide by Jan 21 whether they will play in India or risk removal from the tournament. Meanwhile, as per reports, Pakistan is likely to withdraw if Bangladesh do not play
  • Tata Steel Masters Chess: Pragg loses again, Gukesh settles for a draw
  • WPL: RCB win their 5th consecutive game by beating Gujarat Giants by 61 runs, seal the playoff spot
  • Central Information Commission (CIC) bars lawyers from filing RTI applications for knowing details of cases they are fighting for their clients as it violates a Madras HC order that states that such RTIs defeat the law's core objectives
Stocks slump on Tuesday even as gold and silver toucvh new highs /////// Government advises kin of Indian officials in Bangladesh to return home
oppn parties
Marital Rape: A Split Verdict From Delhi HC

By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2022-05-11 10:37:18

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator.

When the Delhi High Court was hearing the petition challenging the exception given to husbands in Section 375 of the IPC, it was clear from the observations of the two judges that they were not on the same page. The split verdict delivered today confirms that. While Justice Rajiv Shakdher has held that the exception is unconstitutional, Justice Hari Shankar has held otherwise. The bench has granted a certificate to appeal to the Supreme Court as in its view there are substantial questions of law that need greater judicial scrutiny.

During the course of the hearings, Justice Shakdher had observed that "a woman is a woman" and no relationship can be put on a pedestal as if it was considered rape for a person to have sex with a girlfriend or a live-in partner without her consent, the same should apply to a husband having sex with his wife without her consent.

Justice Hari Shankar, on the other hand, had observed that there was a "qualitative difference" in the relationship of married persons with each side having a right to expect sexual relations from each other which was not there in any other relationship.

From the above observations of the two judges, it was obvious that they were interpreting the provision of law in diametrically opposite manner. Hence, it is good that after their split verdict they have granted the certificate to appeal to the Supreme Court. For, a couple of weeks ago, the Karnataka HC had said that  "a man is a man; an act is an act; rape is rape, be it performed by man, the "husband", on a woman who is his "wife" in confirming that it was rape if a man had sex with his wife without her consent. Since different judges in many high courts are delivering different verdicts on the subject, a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court should hear the matter and pronounce its verdict.