Express News Service
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court in February 2023 will hear pleas challenging the Delhi High Court’s split verdict on the issue of criminalisation of marital rape as it sought Centre’s response on Friday.
The exception given in section 375 of the IPC states that sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his adult wife is not rape.
“Leave granted. List matter in February. Issue notice. This position is existing for a long time, we’ll examine it,” bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and BV Nagarathna said.
Pleas challenging HC’s order that were filed by NGO’s Rit Foundation, All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) and Khushboo Saifi argued that marital rape exception created an unfair distinction between married and unmarried women. It was also argued that it violated the privacy, dignity and right of choice of a married woman.
HC’s May 11 order had come in a batch of petitions challenging the exception which exempts prosecution of husbands for non-consensual sexual intercourse with their wives.
Under the exception given in section 375 of the IPC, sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his wife, the wife not being minor, is not rape.
Justice Rajiv Shakdher had favoured striking down the exemption while Justice C Hari Shankar had refused to declare it unconstitutional.
However, saying that substantial questions of law are involved, the bench had granted a certificate to appeal to SC.
Justice Shakdher said marital rape with one stroke deprives nearly one-half of the population of equal protection of the laws.
Adding that it would be tragic if a married woman’s call for justice is not heard even 162 years after the enactment of IPC, he had said, Justice C Harishankar had however said that it would be a complete misadventure for the court to strike down the exception and, thereafter, leave it to the legislature to effect other necessary amendments.
The petitioners before the high court had challenged the constitutionality of the marital rape exception under section 375 IPC (rape) on the ground that it discriminated against married women who are sexually assaulted by their husbands.
Under the exception given in section 375 of the IPC, sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his wife, the wife not being minor, is not rape.
The high court’s verdict had come on PILs filed by NGOs RIT Foundation, All India Democratic Women’s Association, and a man and woman seeking striking down of the exception granted to husbands under the Indian rape law.
ALSO IN TOP COURT
Notice in plea against online gaming ban
The Supreme Court on Friday issued a notice in the Karnataka government’s plea challenging the HC’s order of striking down a law banning online games with stake. A bench of Justices Abdul Nazeer and V Ramasubramanian also tagged the state’s plea with the Tamil Nadu government’s petition challenging Madras HC’s order of striking down the state’s ban on all forms of online gaming.
Class 10 paper case: TN to submit reply
The SC on Friday sought the Tamil Nadu Government’s response in a plea challenging HC’s order of refusing to quash the 2014 government order which made Tamil papers compulsory in the Class 10 state board exam. A bench of Justices SK Kaul and AS Oka also tagged the matter with a similar plea.
‘Govt must create portal for students’
Even as the SC on Friday appreciated the Centre’s stand of introducing the “Academic Mobility Programme” that would give almost 20,000 Ukraine returnees a chance to continue their medical education in alternate universities of other compatible countries, it asked the centre to develop a portal specifying requirements.
(With PTI Inputs)
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court in February 2023 will hear pleas challenging the Delhi High Court’s split verdict on the issue of criminalisation of marital rape as it sought Centre’s response on Friday.
The exception given in section 375 of the IPC states that sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his adult wife is not rape.
“Leave granted. List matter in February. Issue notice. This position is existing for a long time, we’ll examine it,” bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and BV Nagarathna said.
Pleas challenging HC’s order that were filed by NGO’s Rit Foundation, All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) and Khushboo Saifi argued that marital rape exception created an unfair distinction between married and unmarried women. It was also argued that it violated the privacy, dignity and right of choice of a married woman.
HC’s May 11 order had come in a batch of petitions challenging the exception which exempts prosecution of husbands for non-consensual sexual intercourse with their wives.
Under the exception given in section 375 of the IPC, sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his wife, the wife not being minor, is not rape.
Justice Rajiv Shakdher had favoured striking down the exemption while Justice C Hari Shankar had refused to declare it unconstitutional.
However, saying that substantial questions of law are involved, the bench had granted a certificate to appeal to SC.
Justice Shakdher said marital rape with one stroke deprives nearly one-half of the population of equal protection of the laws.
Adding that it would be tragic if a married woman’s call for justice is not heard even 162 years after the enactment of IPC, he had said, Justice C Harishankar had however said that it would be a complete misadventure for the court to strike down the exception and, thereafter, leave it to the legislature to effect other necessary amendments.
The petitioners before the high court had challenged the constitutionality of the marital rape exception under section 375 IPC (rape) on the ground that it discriminated against married women who are sexually assaulted by their husbands.
Under the exception given in section 375 of the IPC, sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his wife, the wife not being minor, is not rape.
The high court’s verdict had come on PILs filed by NGOs RIT Foundation, All India Democratic Women’s Association, and a man and woman seeking striking down of the exception granted to husbands under the Indian rape law.
ALSO IN TOP COURT
Notice in plea against online gaming ban
The Supreme Court on Friday issued a notice in the Karnataka government’s plea challenging the HC’s order of striking down a law banning online games with stake. A bench of Justices Abdul Nazeer and V Ramasubramanian also tagged the state’s plea with the Tamil Nadu government’s petition challenging Madras HC’s order of striking down the state’s ban on all forms of online gaming.
Class 10 paper case: TN to submit reply
The SC on Friday sought the Tamil Nadu Government’s response in a plea challenging HC’s order of refusing to quash the 2014 government order which made Tamil papers compulsory in the Class 10 state board exam. A bench of Justices SK Kaul and AS Oka also tagged the matter with a similar plea.
‘Govt must create portal for students’
Even as the SC on Friday appreciated the Centre’s stand of introducing the “Academic Mobility Programme” that would give almost 20,000 Ukraine returnees a chance to continue their medical education in alternate universities of other compatible countries, it asked the centre to develop a portal specifying requirements.
(With PTI Inputs)
