The Supreme Court has decided to adjourn the hearing on petitions related to marital rape for four weeks. Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, who is set to retire next month, stated that it would not be possible for the current bench to conclude the hearing within a short period.
The decision to delay the hearing came after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and other lawyers requested additional time to prepare their arguments. As a result, the matter will be re-heard by another bench after four weeks.
The CJI emphasised that the issue was complex and would require more time than anticipated. He said, “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.”
This postponement has sparked reactions from various sides, with Senior Advocate Karuna Nundy urging the court to prioritise the case. She highlighted that millions of women are affected by this issue and that a swift resolution is needed for their justice.
Last week, the court began addressing several petitions challenging Exception 2 to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with the legal status of marital rape. This exception states that sexual intercourse by a man with his wife is not considered rape unless the wife is under 15 years old.
Advocate Nundy argued during the hearing that rape is already classified as a crime, but the exclusion of a husband from its definition is problematic. She emphasised that removing this exception would not create a separate offence but would bring husbands under the same legal accountability as other men.
The government, however, has taken a different stance on the matter. The Centre recently submitted an affidavit, expressing concerns about the broader impact of criminalizing marital rape.
The affidavit stressed that removing Exception 2 from Section 375 would have far-reaching consequences for the institution of marriage. The government argued that the issue needs a more comprehensive approach rather than being viewed solely through a legal lens. It stated that criminalizing marital rape could disrupt conjugal relationships and cause significant challenges within marriages.
The affidavit also noted the potential for misuse of amended provisions, highlighting that proving the absence of consent in marital cases could become difficult and contentious.
In the current social structure, the government believes that legal interference in marital relationships could lead to unintended consequences, especially in a rapidly changing society.
The petitions challenging the exception to marital rape include one that arose from a case in Karnataka, where a man was accused of raping his wife and keeping her as a sex slave.
The Karnataka High Court had earlier declined to quash the rape charges against him, sparking further debate over the issue. Additionally, the All India Democratic Women’s Association (AIDWA) and others have petitioned the Supreme Court following a split verdict by the Delhi High Court on marital rape.
On May 12, 2022, a two-judge bench of the Delhi High Court delivered contrasting judgments on whether marital rape should be criminalized. Justice Rajiv Shakdher ruled in favour of criminalising it, while Justice Hari Shankar held the opposite view, maintaining that Exception 2 to Section 375 was constitutional based on intelligible differences.
AIDWA's petition argues that the exception for marital rape undermines the fundamental purpose of rape laws, which aim to prevent sexual activity without consent. The plea states that placing the privacy of marriage above the rights of women contradicts the essence of the law and calls for its amendment.
Follow us
