Delhi High Court on Wednesday delivered a divided judgment on Petitions seeking incrimination of marital rape. When Judge Rajiv Shakir bombed down Exception 2 that protects men and who Forced to have non-consensual intercourse with from their wives criminal The claim under Section 376 IPC, Judge C Hari Shankar disputed saying that the exception did not violate Articles 14, 19 and 21.
Both judges nonetheless agreed to give testimony of Allow an appeal to the Supreme Court as it is a matter of substance of Law. Incrimination petitions of Marital rape has been under consideration in court since 2015 and 2017. RIT and the All India Democratic Women’s Association were major court petitioners.
When the center’s request is rejected for more It’s time to respond again to the petitions, the court has reserved its judgment in the case on Feb 21.
The center that did not present any oral arguments in This issue yeartold the court that its written position of 2017 should It is not treated as a final Because she wants to hold consultations with Stakeholders on the topic first. However, the division bench He said he couldn’t “leave it hanging like This” said government That his own consultation process can go on.
court on The seventh of February had given the center two weeks to clarify its position in The matter has been pending since 2015. Although government Responded to and opposed petitions in 2017, I asked the court in January to postpone the procedures in Case to wait for the outcome of consult him on the topic with States and other stakeholders. The government He said he wanted it place new position on record before the court after consulting.
Head to the top of the court
Clears the divided ruling of the Delhi High Court way for Judgment of the Supreme Court. He. She also Provides an outlet for the center, perhaps even the proposed reforms in criminal enter the law force.
Court between January 7 and February 21 on 23 histories of petitions heard challenging Exception 2 that protect men and who Forced to have non-consensual intercourse with from their wives criminal Prosecution under Section 376 of IPC. arguments on In my name or for me of Petitioners and Intervenors opposing Petitions and Memoranda of A friend of the court heard before bench.
Pledge to provide a specific timetable schedule which will be carried out Consultation process on The issueThe center said that the case has been pending since 2015 and whether the court is waiting. for Such a “fruitful exercise” for For some time, there will be no bias caused And it will be possible for The government To purposefully assist the court.
The stipulation that what “appears to be marital rape” of the wife “may not appear to others as such”, Central government in The year 2017 was so remarkable down The exception “may destabilize the organization of Marriage apart from being an easy tool for Husbands harassed.” Had her also Quote “rising Misuse of Section 498a of IPC” – Cruelty by husband or husband nearby against woman – show how Dealing with laws with violence against women can be misused”for Husbands harassment.
Termination of Exception 2 of IPC 375 Colonial Legacy and Exemption from criminal Prosecutors, Senior Advocate Rebecca John, friend of the court in the case in January had confirmed that the court would preserve the integrity of the body of women hit him down and put people Note that the non-consent of the marital partner must be respected. Chief Lawyer Rajshekhar Rao, another friend of the court in The case has been argued that every day judgment remains on Legislation books women They are deprived of ability to call rape rape.
.
