New Delhi: The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently made a noteworthy observation regarding the absence of recognition of marital rape as an offense in India. The court highlighted that any sexual intercourse, including unnatural sex, between a husband and his wife does not constitute rape, asserting that the wifes consent becomes immaterial in such cases.Legal Interpretation by Justice Gurpal Singh AhluwaliaJustice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia, presiding over the case, emphasized that sexual acts between spouses during a valid marriage do not qualify as rape. The court clarified that even acts such as penetration of the anus of a woman by her husband are exempt from being considered rape if the wife is above fifteen years of age. The judge remarked that in such circumstances, the absence of the wifes consent for unnatural acts holds no significance.However, the court noted an exception under Section 376-B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), where sexual acts with ones wife during separate living due to judicial separation or other reasons would amount to rape.Exception 2 of Section 375: Exemption for married couplesReferring to Exception 2 of Section 375 IPC, the court reiterated that sexual intercourse between a husband and wife, provided the wife is not below fifteen years of age, does not meet the criteria for rape. This exemption shields such acts from prosecution under rape laws.Historical context and legal precedentsThe legal discourse on marital rape gained prominence following the Supreme Courts ruling in the Independent Thought vs Union of India case in October 2017. The court amended Exception 2 of Section 375 to raise the age of consent from fifteen to eighteen years, extending protection to minor wives from sexual exploitation within marriage.Case Overview: Allegations and legal proceedingsThe case under consideration involved a wife accusing her husband of committing unnatural sex on multiple occasions after their marriage. Challenging the FIR lodged by his wife, the husband contended that their relationship shielded them from prosecution under Section 377 of the IPC.Courts ruling, interpretation of IPC sectionsThe High Court, upon scrutinizing relevant sections of the IPC, affirmed that sexual acts between spouses, barring those involving minors, do not constitute rape. Citing a previous judgment by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, the court reaffirmed that the amended definition of rape under Section 375 IPC eliminates the possibility of unnatural offenses between spouses.In conclusion, the court upheld the legal stance that acts of unnatural sex between legally married spouses residing together do not qualify as offenses under Section 377 IPC. Consequently, the court quashed the FIR against the husband, providing clarity on the legal interpretation of marital relations in the Indian judicial system.
