- The raging debate on the subject matter has justifiably caught the imagination of concerned stakeholders, especially those fighting for gender equality, parity, and unbiased treatment long. At the cost of sounding like a stuck record, the women in the country are still treated as second citizens is not lost on anybody despite concerted efforts at ushering in gender equality. Unfortunately, the deeply entrenched patriarchy in the society is still several years away, if not decades, from completely eradicating the menace. Irritatingly, whatever efforts to restore parity are proving to be too little to make an impactful endeavor to alter the equation on the ground.
PC: Aarav Goel
- One of the medieval but overtly male-dominated mindsets still existing in society is the way the issue of marital rape is treated. Usually, it goes unreported. Advancements in the lifestyle and much-improved standing of women in society have allowed the issue of marital rape to come out in the open more frequently. Women no longer feel constrained or inhibited by societal consequences. No wonder, the matter has reached the higher judiciary for informed interpretations of the law within the ambit of the Constitutionally mandated rights. As you are aware, several petitions on the contentious matter are being heard in the Delhi high court.
- For the uninitiated, strong arguments put forth in the petitions were to consider marital rape as a normal rape itself in line with the existing laws on the dehumanizing act perpetrated by perverted elements. Now, the Delhi high court’s two-judge bench’s split verdict on criminalizing marital rape is tantamount to be treated as a setback for the legal battle to rid IPC Section 375 of the exception clause, which stipulates that sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own wife isn’t rape. Justice Rajiv Shakdher ruled the exception unconstitutional, terming it violative of Article 14, Article 15, Article 19(1), and Article 21, respectively.
PC: Law Tendo
- The other judge Justice C Hari Shankar upheld the provision noting that the exception carved for marital relationships was based on intelligible differentia and was reasonable. Note that the UK in 1991 and several post-colonial nations have criminalized marital rape leaving India in a strange club with the likes of Bangladesh, Nigeria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc. The Union Government must change tack here. Its affidavit listing the issue shouldn’t be treated merely as a question concerning the constitutional validity of a statutory provision because of far-reaching socio-legal implications for the country was most unfortunate.
- Mind you, such arguments reduce constitutionally guaranteed rights to abstractions. Undeniably, the reality is that fundamental rights have helped citizens discover agency, dignity, and self-preservation. Inarguably, making consent immaterial in a marital relationship has the effect of reducing Article 14, which guarantees to every citizen equality before the law and the equal protection of all laws, to a high-sounding principle without substance for an assaulted woman. This places those wives on a weaker footing against belligerent husbands who repeatedly rape them knowing fully well that the law shields them. Thus, the judiciary is the best hope for heralding gender justice. Imperative, it must fast-track appeals against this verdict sooner than later.
