preloader image

Loading...

The Legal Affair

Let's talk Law

The Legal Affair

Let's talk Law

Gujarat High Court’s Ruling on Marital Rape Exception: Embracing Gender Equality and Upholding Rights 

Gujarat High Court’s Ruling on Marital Rape Exception: Embracing Gender Equality and Upholding Rights 

Introduction:

In the case of XYZ vs. ABC , the Gujarat High Court recently addressed the contentious issue of marital rape exception under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The petitioner challenged the provision, arguing that it grants immunity to husbands engaging in non-consensual sexual acts with their wives above 18 years of age. The Court, led by Justice Divyesh A. Joshi, highlighted the global landscape where numerous countries, including the UK, have abolished such exemptions. It also cited instances where family members, including a mother-in-law, were allegedly complicit in aiding and abetting sexual assault against the complainant. The Court’s observations centered on the fundamental rights enshrined in Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21, emphasizing dignity, bodily integrity, and gender equality.

Arguments:  

The crux of the case revolved around the petitioner’s plea to abolish Exception 2 of Section 375, contending that it perpetuates gender-based discrimination. The defense argued that the exception was a result of societal norms and values, reflecting the purported sanctity of marriage and privacy within a marital union. The prosecution vehemently opposed this stance, asserting that such exceptions contravene fundamental rights, reinforcing unequal power dynamics within marriage.

Court’s Judgement:  

The Gujarat High Court, while denying bail to the accused (mother-in-law), underscored the violation of multiple fundamental rights, condemning the silence of the accused in preventing the alleged heinous acts. Stressing upon the inalienable rights of dignity, liberty, and bodily autonomy, the Court emphasized the necessity of breaking the culture of silence surrounding gender violence. It unequivocally declared that the rights enshrined in the Constitution are applicable to both men and women, admonishing societal norms that condone or trivialize sexual offenses. The Court highlighted the prevalence of unreported cases due to economic dependency, social ostracization, and fear, indicating that reported figures might only represent a fraction of the actual instances of violence against women.