Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud on Wednesday postponed the hearing on petitions challenging the immunity granted to husbands in cases of marital rape . The hearing, initially set to conclude before his retirement on November 10, has been deferred by four weeks.
A bench comprising the CJI and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra had begun the final hearing on October 17. Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan and other key lawyers requested at least a day each to present their arguments comprehensively. The Supreme Court closes for Diwali vacation on October 26 and reopens on November 4, leaving the CJI with limited time before stepping down.
With the apex court closing for Diwali vacation on October 26 and reopening on November 4, the CJI would effectively have only five working days to hear and deliver a verdict on this sensitive issue before his retirement on November 10. Recognizing the time constraints, the court stated, "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," and ordered the pleas to be listed before another bench after four weeks.
The SC bench had announced on October 17 that it would determine the constitutionality of criminal law provisions in the IPC and BNS. The CJI requested the petitioners' opinions on the government's argument that criminalizing such acts would have a profound effect on marital relationships and cause significant disruptions to the marriage institution.
The government had argued that if a man's sexual acts with his wife were criminalized as "rape," it could have a severe impact on the marital relationship and result in serious disturbances to the institution of marriage.
"We have deep regret. We wanted to continue here," said Sankaranarayanan, while the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta commented on the complexity of criminalizing marital rape. "Marriage does not obliterate the concept of sexual consent, but...criminalising marital rape would require assessment of the case from different perspectives," he said.
Senior advocate Karuna Nundy, speaking for a petitioner, highlighted the urgency of the issue, since it affects millions of women. She urged the CJI to continue with the judgment, emphasising his legacy of pivotal rulings.
The Supreme Court is set to decide the validity of legal provisions that provide immunity to husbands from prosecution for rape if their wives are not minors. The Centre argued that criminalising such acts could disrupt marital relationships.
The Indian Penal Code 's Section 375, which has now been repealed and replaced by the BNS, contained an exception clause stating that sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his wife, provided the wife is not a minor, does not constitute rape.
The new law, under Exception 2 to Section 63 (rape), maintains that "sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under 18 years of age, is not rape".
In January 2023, the Supreme Court sought the government's response on petitions challenging this IPC provision. A similar plea concerning another provision of the BNS was also issued a notice by the court in May 2023.
The case traces back to the Delhi high court's split verdict of May 2022, where one judge, Justice Rajiv Shakdher, argued that the marital rape exception was unconstitutional, while Justice C Hari Shankar upheld its constitutionality, citing an intelligible differentia. The matter was referred to the Supreme Court for a final ruling.
Additionally, a plea against a Karnataka high court ruling, which allowed the prosecution of a husband for raping his wife, has also been filed. The Karnataka court held that exempting husbands from rape allegations violates Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law.
A bench comprising the CJI and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra had begun the final hearing on October 17. Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan and other key lawyers requested at least a day each to present their arguments comprehensively. The Supreme Court closes for Diwali vacation on October 26 and reopens on November 4, leaving the CJI with limited time before stepping down.
With the apex court closing for Diwali vacation on October 26 and reopening on November 4, the CJI would effectively have only five working days to hear and deliver a verdict on this sensitive issue before his retirement on November 10. Recognizing the time constraints, the court stated, "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," and ordered the pleas to be listed before another bench after four weeks.
The SC bench had announced on October 17 that it would determine the constitutionality of criminal law provisions in the IPC and BNS. The CJI requested the petitioners' opinions on the government's argument that criminalizing such acts would have a profound effect on marital relationships and cause significant disruptions to the marriage institution.
The government had argued that if a man's sexual acts with his wife were criminalized as "rape," it could have a severe impact on the marital relationship and result in serious disturbances to the institution of marriage.
"We have deep regret. We wanted to continue here," said Sankaranarayanan, while the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta commented on the complexity of criminalizing marital rape. "Marriage does not obliterate the concept of sexual consent, but...criminalising marital rape would require assessment of the case from different perspectives," he said.
Senior advocate Karuna Nundy, speaking for a petitioner, highlighted the urgency of the issue, since it affects millions of women. She urged the CJI to continue with the judgment, emphasising his legacy of pivotal rulings.
The Supreme Court is set to decide the validity of legal provisions that provide immunity to husbands from prosecution for rape if their wives are not minors. The Centre argued that criminalising such acts could disrupt marital relationships.
The Indian Penal Code 's Section 375, which has now been repealed and replaced by the BNS, contained an exception clause stating that sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his wife, provided the wife is not a minor, does not constitute rape.
The new law, under Exception 2 to Section 63 (rape), maintains that "sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under 18 years of age, is not rape".
In January 2023, the Supreme Court sought the government's response on petitions challenging this IPC provision. A similar plea concerning another provision of the BNS was also issued a notice by the court in May 2023.
The case traces back to the Delhi high court's split verdict of May 2022, where one judge, Justice Rajiv Shakdher, argued that the marital rape exception was unconstitutional, while Justice C Hari Shankar upheld its constitutionality, citing an intelligible differentia. The matter was referred to the Supreme Court for a final ruling.
Additionally, a plea against a Karnataka high court ruling, which allowed the prosecution of a husband for raping his wife, has also been filed. The Karnataka court held that exempting husbands from rape allegations violates Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law.
You may also like
China, India should properly manage differences: Xi Jinping to PM Modi
Sikh woman found dead in Walmart bakery oven in Canada
Cyclone Dana: Leave homes & come to relief centres, Odisha Minister to people
Cam Smith's stance on LIV Golf speaks volumes as major champion sends clear message to PGA Tour
'I'm a golf legend who won the Masters - I know who the best player of all time is'
