In a significant development today, the Indian government has firmly opposed petitions seeking to criminalize marital rape, presenting its stance before the Supreme Court. This opposition comes amid an ongoing debate regarding the validity of Exception 2 under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which exempts a husband from being prosecuted for raping his wife, effectively maintaining that sexual relations within marriage cannot be classified as rape.
Government’s Stand: Marital Rape as a Complex Social Issue
In its submission, the Centre has reiterated its position that criminalizing marital rape involves complex socio-legal implications and thus requires extensive consultations with various stakeholders. The government emphasized that marriage in India is viewed as a socio-cultural institution with mutual obligations, and criminalizing certain aspects of it, such as marital rape, could undermine the institution itself.
According to the Centre, existing laws already provide sufficient remedies for cases of domestic violence, cruelty, and sexual abuse within a marriage. It further argued that instead of focusing solely on legal reforms, there is a need for broader social change, which would involve educating people about consent and addressing the ingrained socio-cultural norms around marriage.
Petitioners’ View: Violation of Women’s Rights
Contrary to the government’s stance, activists and petitioners argue that the exception for marital rape is unconstitutional, violating a woman’s right to bodily autonomy and dignity. Petitioners assert that marriage should not serve as a shield for sexual violence and demand the removal of this archaic law. They emphasize that no individual, including a husband, should be allowed to infringe upon the fundamental right of a woman to consent, which is enshrined under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution(News24).
The Split Verdict in the Delhi High Court
This case has garnered considerable attention since the Delhi High Court delivered a split verdict in 2022. Justice Rajiv Shakdher had declared Exception 2 unconstitutional, arguing that consent remains central in all forms of sexual relations, regardless of the marital bond. However, Justice C Hari Shankar dissented, maintaining that marital rape should not be equated with other forms of rape, and that the law needs to consider the broader implications of treating the marital relationship the same way as other interpersonal relationships.
Centre’s Call for Legislative Decision
The government has also highlighted that such a significant legal change should come from the legislature rather than the judiciary, citing that the legislative body is better equipped to evaluate the far-reaching consequences of criminalizing marital rape. The Centre contends that this issue affects the very foundation of Indian society and needs careful deliberation through a broader democratic process.
In its affidavit, the government underscored that laws pertaining to family life, particularly those within marriage, should not be amended without considering the socio-economic and cultural diversity of India. Furthermore, it called for a “holistic” approach, focusing on legislative and social reform to address the issue rather than just a legal solution(Hindustan Times).
The Larger Context: Criminalization of Marital Rape in India
India remains one of the few countries where marital rape is not criminalized, which has sparked intense criticism from human rights organizations, activists, and international bodies. Globally, most countries have already recognized the need to eliminate such exceptions, acknowledging the role of consent in all sexual relationships.
Those in favor of criminalizing marital rape argue that the exemption perpetuates gender inequality and normalized sexual violence within marriage. They emphasize that criminalizing marital rape is necessary for India to meet its international obligations under conventions like CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women).
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s decision on this contentious issue could have profound implications on the legal landscape regarding women’s rights in India. While the Centre has called for a more measured and socially informed approach, activists remain firm in their stance that marital rape is a clear violation of a woman’s fundamental rights. As the debate continues, it remains to be seen whether India will follow the global trend of criminalizing marital rape or maintain its current legal framework.
This case brings to the forefront crucial questions about consent, gender justice, and the balance between legal reform and societal norms in India.
Read More : livelaw
