By using this site, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Accept
ApniLawApniLawApniLaw
  • Home
  • Law Forum
  • Find Lawyers
  • Legal Services
  • Legal News
  • Legal Jobs
  • Legal Articles
    • Documentation
    • Marriage and Divorce
    • Land Dispute & Will
    • Civil
    • Criminal
    • Supreme Court
    • High Court
  • Bare Acts
    • BNSS
    • BNS
    • BSA
    • CrPC
    • DPDP
    • Hindu Marriage Act
    • IPC
    • POCSO
Reading: Centre Defends Marital Rape Exception, Claims Alternative Remedies Exist for Protecting Women
Share
Notification Show More
Font ResizerAa
ApniLawApniLaw
Font ResizerAa
  • Supreme Court
  • High Court
  • Acts
  • Documentation
  • BNSS
  • Home
  • Law Forum
  • Find Lawyers
  • Legal Services
  • Legal News
  • Legal Jobs
  • Legal Articles
    • Documentation
    • Marriage and Divorce
    • Land Dispute & Will
    • Civil
    • Criminal
    • Supreme Court
    • High Court
  • Bare Acts
    • BNSS
    • BNS
    • BSA
    • CrPC
    • DPDP
    • Hindu Marriage Act
    • IPC
    • POCSO
Have an existing account? Sign In
Follow US
  • Advertise
© 2022 Foxiz News Network. Ruby Design Company. All Rights Reserved.
ApniLaw > Blog > News > Centre Defends Marital Rape Exception, Claims Alternative Remedies Exist for Protecting Women
News

Centre Defends Marital Rape Exception, Claims Alternative Remedies Exist for Protecting Women

Amna Kabeer
Last updated: November 18, 2024 1:09 am
Amna Kabeer
9 months ago
Share
Centre Defends Marital Rape Exception, Claims Alternative Remedies Exist for Protecting Women
Centre Defends Marital Rape Exception, Claims Alternative Remedies Exist for Protecting Women
SHARE

Centre Defends Marital Rape Exception:

In petitions seeking the criminalization of marital rape in India, the Union government has filed a preliminary affidavit, arguing that existing legal remedies already protect married women from sexual violence. The Centre claims that categorizing non-consensual sex within marriage as “rape” could be “excessively harsh” and disproportionate. In oher words, the Centre defends marital rape exception following the recent petitions, although this has resulted in hues and cries.

The affidavit, submitted by Advocate AK Sharma, states that a “holistic approach” is required to determine the constitutionality of Exception 2 to Section 375 and Section 376B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with Section 198B of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The Centre asserts that consultation with all states is necessary before making any changes and that criminalizing marital rape falls under the realm of legislative policy, not judicial intervention.

The Centre acknowledges that a woman’s consent is not invalidated by marriage. Although, it argues that the consequences of violating consent within marriage should differ from those outside it. Citing various legal provisions such as Sections 354, 354A, 354B, and 498A of the IPC, along with the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the affidavit claims these laws already provide serious penalties for violations within marriage.

The government also relies on a 2022 report from the National Commission for Women. This report recommends retaining the marital rape exception (MRE). The report indicates that society cannot equate married women with unmarried women. Hence, warns that punitive measures could lead to economic hardships for the wife and her children.

The affidavit challenges the petitioners’ argument that marriage is a “private institution,” stating that it is the constitutional duty of the State to regulate certain aspects of marriage. This inclides the rights, duties, and consequences involved. The Centre further argues that the institution of marriage creates a distinction. Hence, justifying a different legal treatment of sexual relations within marriage compared to outside.

The affidavit adds that the legislature has the right to retain the marital rape exception. This is if it believes it is necessary to preserve the institution of marriage.

Regarding Article 21, the Centre asserts that not every violation of consent should automatically lead to charges. The charges are mentioned under Section 375/376 of the IPC. While acknowledging that a man does not have the right to violate his wife’s consent, the Centre argues that labeling such acts as “rape” would be excessively punitive. The Centre counters the petitioners’ claim that authorities should treat all forms of sexual violence identically. Hence, describing this approach as overly simplistic. It reiterates that remedies, including provisions of the IPC and the Domestic Violence Act, offer sufficient protection for married women.

The affidavit comes in the backdrop of multiple petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the marital rape exception. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra is hearing the case. It includes appeals against the Delhi High Court’s split verdict on the matter. Additionally it challenges the Karnataka High Court judgment that upheld charges against a husband under Section 376 IPC for forcing his wife into sex.

Conclusion

The ongoing hearings will decide the fate of the marital rape exception. This is along with significant social and legal implications for marital rights and sexual consent in India.

You Might Also Like

Filing a Complaint With NHRC Under the Protection of Human Rights Act (Section 13 & Procedure)

Husband’s Father Not Automatically Liable For Widow’s Maintenance Under Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act: Patna HC

Trial Court Cannot Review Its Final Orders: Jammu and Kashmir HC

Attempted Offence Under Section 377 IPC Is Punishable Under Section 511 IPC: Kerala HC

Section 289 – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita(BNSS) – Application Of Chapter.

TAGGED:CentreLawsMarital rapeMarriageMarriage LawsProtection for womenRightsWomen
Share This Article
Facebook Email Print
Previous Article Supreme Court Grants Interim Protection To Journalist Abhishek Upadhyay, Stalls Coercive Action Over article On UP Caste Dynamics Supreme Court Grants Interim Protection To Journalist Abhishek Upadhyay, Stalls Coercive Action Over article On UP Caste Dynamics
Next Article How To Obtain A Copy Of Your Lease Agreement? How To Obtain A Copy Of Your Lease Agreement?
1 Comment
  • Pingback: Outraging Woman’s Modesty Includes Physical and Verbal Acts

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Follow US

Find US on Social Medias
FacebookLike
XFollow
InstagramFollow
YoutubeSubscribe

Weekly Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!
Popular News
Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Challenging FIRs Against Gangster Lawrence Bishnoi Over Prison Interview
News

Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Challenging FIRs Against Gangster Lawrence Bishnoi Over Prison Interview

Amna Kabeer
By Amna Kabeer
11 months ago
Writ Petition Maintainable Against Private Banks for Unauthorized Freezing of Accounts: Allahabad HC
Woman’s Right to Shared Household Remains Valid Even In Absence Of Domestic Violence: Delhi High Court
Calcutta High Court Orders Release Of Student Protestor Sayan Lahiri, Criticises Police Action
Consent For Physical Relations Doesn’t Include Sharing Private Videos: Delhi HC
- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -
Ad imageAd image

Your one-stop destination for legal news, articles, queries, and a directory of lawyers in India – all under one roof at ApniLaw.

Stay Updated

  • BNSS
  • News
  • Documentation
  • Acts
  • Supreme Court
  • High Court

Information

  • ApniLaw Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service

Advertise

  • Advertise with us
  • Newsletters
  • Deal

Find Us on Socials

ApniLawApniLaw
Follow US
© ApniLaw 2025. All Rights Reserved.
bg-n
Join Us!
Subscribe to our newsletter and never miss our latest news, podcasts etc..
Zero spam, Unsubscribe at any time.

More Interesting News

Supreme Court Grants Bail to Humayun Merchant In Money Laundering Case

Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226 Cannot Be Invoked Unless Clear Evidence Of Miscarriage Of Justice: J&K HC

Information Technology Act Of 2000: Key Provisions, Responsibilities, And Amendments

Section 67A of the Information Technology Act, Penalizes Publication of Sexually Explicit Material in Electronic Form

login
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?