Author: Riya S. Rane, Hindi Vidya Prachar Samiti’s College of Law
To the Point
The marital rape exception under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) exempts husbands from prosecution for rape committed against their wives, provided the wife is above eighteen years of age. This exception has ignited intense constitutional debate, particularly in light of evolving interpretations of fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India. While criminal law recognises consent as central to sexual autonomy, the marital rape exception continues to preserve a colonial-era notion of implied consent within marriage. The conflict lies between preserving marital privacy and upholding a woman’s right to bodily integrity, dignity, and equality before the law.
Use of Legal Jargon
The marital rape exception represents a statutory immunity rooted in the doctrine of coverture, under which a wife’s legal identity was historically merged with that of her husband. The exception creates a classification based on marital status, raising concerns of hostile discrimination under Article 14 of the Constitution. It also infringes substantive due process by violating a woman’s sexual autonomy, decisional privacy, and bodily integrity, all of which form part of Article 21. The provision has been criticised as manifestly arbitrary, failing to align with constitutional morality and the State’s positive obligation to protect individuals from sexual violence, even within the private domain of marriage.
The Proof
Section 375 IPC defines rape and expressly excludes sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife, not being under eighteen years of age, from its ambit. This legislative exception contradicts modern understandings of marriage as a relationship of equals. Studies and governmental reports reveal that sexual violence within marriage is widespread but remains largely unreported due to societal pressure and absence of legal recognition. By denying married women protection against rape, the law creates an unjust distinction between married and unmarried women. The argument that criminalising marital rape would destabilise marriage is speculative and unsupported by empirical evidence, and it places the sanctity of marriage above the fundamental rights of women.
Abstract
The marital rape exception under the Indian Penal Code represents a significant departure from constitutional guarantees of equality, dignity, and personal liberty. This article analyses the historical foundations of the exception, examines its constitutional validity, and evaluates judicial responses to the issue. It argues that marriage cannot be treated as irrevocable consent to sexual intercourse and that the exception perpetuates systemic gender inequality. The article concludes that the marital rape exception is constitutionally untenable and necessitates legislative reform consistent with constitutional principles and international human rights obligations.
Case Laws
1. Independent Thought v. Union of India (2017)
The Supreme Court read down the marital rape exception to hold that sexual intercourse with a wife aged between 15 and 18 years constitutes rape. The Court recognised that marriage does not extinguish a woman’s right to bodily integrity and dignity.
2. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)
The Court recognised the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21, encompassing bodily autonomy and decisional freedom. This judgment undermines the concept of presumed or blanket consent within marriage.
3. RIT Foundation v. Union of India (2022)
The Delhi High Court delivered a split verdict on the constitutional validity of the marital rape exception. One opinion struck it down as violative of Articles 14 and 21, while the other deferred the issue to legislative wisdom, highlighting judicial divergence.
4. State of Karnataka v. Krishnappa (2000)
The Supreme Court held that sexual violence is an unlawful intrusion into a woman’s privacy and dignity, reinforcing that consent is central to lawful sexual relations irrespective of the relationship between the parties.
Conclusion
The marital rape exception under the IPC is a remnant of patriarchal and colonial legal thought that is incompatible with India’s constitutional framework. It denies married women equal protection of the law, undermines their autonomy, and perpetuates gender-based discrimination. Constitutional rights do not cease upon marriage, nor can marital status serve as a shield against criminal liability for sexual violence. Concerns regarding misuse or marital harmony cannot override the fundamental rights to equality, dignity, and personal liberty. Consequently, the exception fails constitutional scrutiny and must be repealed or substantially amended to reflect contemporary constitutional values.
FAQS
1. What is the marital rape exception under the IPC?
The marital rape exception is contained in Section 375 IPC, which states that sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife, provided she is above eighteen years of age, does not constitute rape.
2. Why is the marital rape exception controversial?
The exception is controversial because it denies married women legal protection against sexual violence, thereby violating principles of equality, dignity, and bodily autonomy guaranteed under the Constitution.
3. Does the Constitution explicitly prohibit marital rape?
While the Constitution does not explicitly mention marital rape, Articles 14 and 21 guarantee equality before law and the right to life and personal liberty, which judicial interpretation has expanded to include bodily integrity and sexual autonomy.
4. Has the Supreme Court declared marital rape unconstitutional?
As of now, the Supreme Court has not conclusively struck down the marital rape exception for adult wives. However, it has read down the exception in cases involving minor wives and has recognised principles that challenge its constitutional validity.
5. What are the arguments against criminalising marital rape?
Opponents argue that criminalisation may lead to misuse of law, interfere with marital privacy, and destabilise the institution of marriage. These arguments, however, are increasingly viewed as insufficient to justify denial of fundamental rights.
6. What reforms are suggested regarding marital rape laws?
Legal reform advocates suggest removing the marital rape exception entirely and ensuring that consent remains central to all sexual relations, irrespective of marital status, while also incorporating safeguards against misuse.
