Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
  • ftr-facebook
  • ftr-instagram
  • ftr-instagram
search-icon-img
Advertisement

CJI-led bench defers hearing on pleas against immunity to husbands in marital rape cases

The bench, also comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, fixed the pleas for hearing after four weeks by another bench
  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
featured-img featured-img
The CJI said he will not be able to conclude the hearing and render the verdict if the hearing does not conclude before the top court closes for Diwali vacation. PTI file
Advertisement

Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, who is demitting office on November 10, on Wednesday deferred hearing by four weeks on pleas challenging the immunity granted to husbands in cases of marital rape.

The CJI said he will not be able to conclude the hearing and render the verdict if the hearing does not conclude before the top court closes for Diwali vacation.

Justice Chandrachud said all the lawyers concerned have to be given time sought for making the submissions in the matter.

Advertisement

The bench, also comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, fixed the pleas for hearing after four weeks by another bench.

It commenced the hearing on October 17. The Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) grant immunity from prosecution to a husband for the offence of rape if he forces his wife, who is not a minor, to have sex with him.

Advertisement

Under the exception clause of Section 375 of the IPC, now replaced by the BNS, sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his wife, the wife not being minor, is not rape.

Even under the new law, exception 2 to Section 63 (rape) says that “sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under eighteen years of age, is not rape”.

The Centre said in a fast-growing and ever-changing social and family structure, misuse of the amended provisions could not be ruled out as it would be difficult for a person to prove whether consent was there or not.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Home tlbr_img2 Opinion tlbr_img3 Classifieds tlbr_img4 Videos tlbr_img5 E-Paper