Beyond Civil Relief - A Socio-Legal Analysis Of Legal Gaps In Criminalization Of Marital Rape In India
- IJLLR Journal
- 50 minutes ago
- 2 min read
Aditi Tamhankar, KES’ Shri Jayantilal H. Patel Law College - Affiliated to Mumbai University
ABSTRACT
Despite increasing awareness of women's rights and autonomy under Indian Constitutional Law and the international legal order, the Indian Penal Code (IPC) continues not to criminalize marital rape. This essay is a critique of constitutional and legal injustices that have emerged as a consequence of Section 375 IPC's Exception 2, withholding equal protection against sexual violence for married women. Denial of criminal channels for sexual violence in marriage and refusal to define consent in marriage quite evidently are two definitional failures by the analysis, which also illustrates how the legal system remains bogged down by the antiquated assumptions of presumed consent and male privilege. The research also explores current legal trends through case law, policy reports, doctrinal analysis, and international human rights law norms. The case of RIT Foundation v. Union of India, which has once again placed the issue in the limelight. The paper contends that civil remedies under the Domestic Violence Act are inadequate and that Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution are being violated by not criminalizing marital rape. Based on this analysis, the paper calls for gender-sensitive legal reform that grounds all consensual sexual activity, including marriage, on consent and eliminates the marital rape exception.
Keywords: Marital rape, Exception 2, Section 375 IPC, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Section 63, consent, bodily autonomy, Indian Constitution, Article 14, Article 15, Article 21, domestic violence, gender justice, criminalization of marital rape, implied consent doctrine, RIT Foundation v. Union of India, Joseph Shine v. Union of India, Independent Thought v. Union of India, legal reform, women's rights, sexual violence in marriage, patriarchal law, constitutional rights, CEDAW, Delhi High Court split verdict, bodily integrity, judicial activism, legal gap, civil vs. criminal remedy, human rights law, law commission report, NFHS-5 data, coverture doctrine.
