Petitions relating to marital rape matter to be reheard after four weeks
New Delhi [India], October 23 (ANI): Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, who is retiring next month, adjourned the hearing on a batch of petitions relating to marital rape matters on Wednesday, saying that it wouldn't be possible for the bench led by his to conclude the hearing in the foreseeable future.
Adjourning the hearing, a bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud said that the matter will be reheard after four weeks.
CJI DY Chandrachud adjourned the matter after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and other counsel said that they would require a day time to address the court.
"In view of the time estimate, we are of the view that it would not be possible to complete the hearings in the foreseeable future," CJI Chandrachud said. The matter will be re-heard by another bench after four weeks.
"In view of the time estimate, we are of the view that it would not be possible to complete the hearings in the foreseeable future," CJI Chandrachud said. The matter will be re-heard by another bench after four weeks.
However, senior Advocate Karuna Nundy stressed the CJI Chandrachud to hear the matter and said the matter should be heard for the justice of the millions of women.
The top court last week began hearing on the batch of petitions challenging Exception 2 to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code.
In the last hearing, Senior Advocate Karuna Nundy argued that rape is already an offence, and only the husband is excluded from its ambit and said that declaring the exception as unconstitutional may not create a separate offence.
The top court last week began hearing on the batch of petitions challenging Exception 2 to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code.
In the last hearing, Senior Advocate Karuna Nundy argued that rape is already an offence, and only the husband is excluded from its ambit and said that declaring the exception as unconstitutional may not create a separate offence.
The Centre recently filed an affidavit in the matter relating to marital rape and said that striking down Exception 2 of Section 375 of IPC on the ground of its constitutional validity will have a far-reaching effect on the institution of marriage and needs a comprehensive approach rather than a strictly legal approach. Centre stressed that it should not be interfered unless a separate suitably tailored penal remedy is provided by the legislature.
A centre affidavit was filed in response to the petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Exception 2 to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which de-criminalises rape by a husband on his wife.
Exception 2 to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which defines rape, states that sexual intercourse by a man with his wife is not rape, unless the wife is below 15 years of age.
Exception 2 to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which defines rape, states that sexual intercourse by a man with his wife is not rape, unless the wife is below 15 years of age.
The Centre has informed the Supreme Court that criminalisation of marital rape may severely impact the conjugal relationship and may lead to serious disturbances in the institution of marriage.
"In the fast-growing and ever-changing social and family structure, misuse of the amended provisions can also not be ruled out, as it would be difficult and challenging for a person to prove whether consent was there or not," Centre said in the affidavit.
"In the fast-growing and ever-changing social and family structure, misuse of the amended provisions can also not be ruled out, as it would be difficult and challenging for a person to prove whether consent was there or not," Centre said in the affidavit.
Centre, in affidavit, informed the SC that matter relating to marital rape will have very far-reaching socio-legal implications in the country and therefore, needs a comprehensive approach rather than a strictly legal approach.
The Centre explained that Section 375 covers within its ambit all acts, from single act of unwilling sex to gross perversion and said that Section 375 is a well-thought provision, which tries to cover every act of sexual abuse by a man on a woman within its four walls.
The Centre explained that Section 375 covers within its ambit all acts, from single act of unwilling sex to gross perversion and said that Section 375 is a well-thought provision, which tries to cover every act of sexual abuse by a man on a woman within its four walls.
Various petitions were filed in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of the exception to the marital rape issue.
One petition is against Karnataka HC judgement, which declined to quash the charge of rape against a man accused of raping and keeping his wife as a sex slave.
Exception 2 to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which defines rape, states that sexual intercourse by a man with his wife is not rape, unless the wife is below 15 years of age.
One petition is against Karnataka HC judgement, which declined to quash the charge of rape against a man accused of raping and keeping his wife as a sex slave.
Exception 2 to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which defines rape, states that sexual intercourse by a man with his wife is not rape, unless the wife is below 15 years of age.
Earlier, the All India Democratic Women's Association (AIDWA) among others moved the Supreme Court against the Delhi High Court's split verdict on an issue relating to criminalising marital rape matter.
The two- judges Bench of Delhi HC on May 12, 2022 pronounced a split verdict on an issue relating to criminalising marital rape. Delhi HC's Judge Justice Rajiv Shakdher rules in favour of criminalising while Justice Hari Shankar disagreed with the opinion and held that Exception 2 to Section 375 does not violate the Constitution as it is based on intelligible differences.
The two- judges Bench of Delhi HC on May 12, 2022 pronounced a split verdict on an issue relating to criminalising marital rape. Delhi HC's Judge Justice Rajiv Shakdher rules in favour of criminalising while Justice Hari Shankar disagreed with the opinion and held that Exception 2 to Section 375 does not violate the Constitution as it is based on intelligible differences.
AIDWA, in its plea had said that the exception allowed to marital rape is destructive and in opposition to the object of rape laws, which clearly ban sexual activity sans consent. It places the privacy of a marriage at a pedestal above the rights of the woman in the marriage, the plea said.
The petition said that Marital Rape Exception is in violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and 21 of the Constitution. (ANI)
The petition said that Marital Rape Exception is in violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(a) and 21 of the Constitution. (ANI)
Next Story