Sex with wife under 18 will be considered rape: Supreme Court

Agencies
October 11, 2017

New Delhi, Oct 11: In a sensational verdict, the Supreme Court (SC) on Wednesday ruled that sex with a wife who is under 18 years of age is rape and therefore a crime.

The top court did not rule on 'marital rape', which is sexual intercourse forced upon a spouse no matter what their age.

Before today's SC ruling, there was an exception in Section 375 rape law provisions that protected a man who had sexual relations with his wife even if she was under 18, which is the age of consent.

"Exception 2 in Section 375 of IPC (Indian Penal Code) granting protection to husband is violative of constitution and fundamental rights of minor bride', says Supreme Court.

The top court's verdict upholds the rights of 2.3 crore child brides in the country.

The SC rejected the plea of the Centre which justified the provision on the grounds that child marriage is a reality in the country and such marriage has to be protected.

A bench headed by Justice Madan B Lokur had on September 6 asked the Centre how Parliament could create an exception in a law when the age of consent is 18.

Also in September, the apex court had said it did not want to go into the aspect of marital rape, but when the age of consent was 18 years for "all purposes", why was such an exception made in the IPC.

Responding to the query, the Centre's counsel had said if this exception under the IPC goes, then it would open up the arena of marital rape+ which does not exist in India.

"Economic and educational development in the country is still uneven and child marriages are still taking place. It has been therefore decided to retain the age of 15 years under Exception 2 so as to give protection to husband and wife against criminalising the sexual activity between them. It is also estimated that there are 23 million child brides in the country. Hence, criminalising the consummation of a marriage with such a serious offence such as rape would not be appropriate and practical," the Centre had said.

As per the National Family Health Survey, 46 per cent of women between the ages of 18-29 years were married before the age of 18.
 

Comments

U NEED TO GO THRU STATISTICS... Many girls IN ANOTHER COMMUNITY are threatened and raped before they get to the marriage age from their own family members as well as the saints , most of them are in jails... 

PK
 - 
Thursday, 12 Oct 2017

Some community girls are used and misused by the men and the girl tolerates b4 the marriage. The drunken men alwz escape with cheddi culture by threatening the young girls and their parents.... Go thru the statistics... It is better to get married and take responsibility of the family if the girl is ready to marry.

 

Shareef
 - 
Thursday, 12 Oct 2017

Dear Prathima,

You said some communities like under age girls for..,  

see my sister, what difference does it make age below 18 to 15. Do they have more power than girls above 18. 

does girl become very old if she is above 18.  Above 18means usually it can go upto 28.

95% marriage of girls take place between 16-30

May God protect our girls and boys also.

 

Sharifaka
 - 
Wednesday, 11 Oct 2017

Only the girl can say if she has been raped or not

what about other religion girls starts having sex immediate after puberty? even some try when they enter  highschool.

MSMS
 - 
Wednesday, 11 Oct 2017

Listen carefully,  the above text says :

    "  Sex with a wife who is under 18yrs of  age is rape and therefore a crime. "

 

It interpretes as child marriage is invalid.

If the marriage is invalid how do they become wife and husband.

So this rule may does not applicable such wife.

 

Naresh
 - 
Wednesday, 11 Oct 2017

This law is not thought through. Judges need the input of psychologists to understand the behaviour of adolescents. There are teenagers today having relationships before 18. Are they going to throw them in jail?

Ibrahm
 - 
Wednesday, 11 Oct 2017

Ridiculous judgement. Marriage is society's way of allowing for the purpose of having children, since the married couple will then have to make the necessary sacrifices to bring up the children. If under 18 is statutory rape then why allow the marriage in the first place? The SC is coming up in many cases with foolish decisions that are against accepted norms and practices. The SC will risk making itself into an impotent body if it does not have a clue on how this is viewed by the people at large.

Unknown
 - 
Wednesday, 11 Oct 2017

Underage marriage is still practiced by muslims 

Stranger
 - 
Wednesday, 11 Oct 2017

Many pedophile worshipers belonging to a piece full community disguising as hindu are venting their anger against this judgement for reasons very well known to all. next we should ban all books / texts /manuals/biographies which eulogizes pedophiles/ pedophilia.

Prathima
 - 
Wednesday, 11 Oct 2017

Some community men like young underage girls for . We welcome the order.

Sreenath
 - 
Wednesday, 11 Oct 2017

Is its applicable only to Hindus or is it also applicable to Muslims? ..I see lot of them getting married at 15year 2 children by 18yrs..

Manish Raj
 - 
Wednesday, 11 Oct 2017

What if the wife does not tell the husband the correct age and inter course is consensual? Later on there is marital discord, can then it be considered as rape?

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 3,2020

Mar 3: Just hours after the ending of a week-long “reduction” in violence that was crucial for Donald Trump’s peace deal in Afghanistan, the Taliban struck again: On Monday, they killed three people and injured about a dozen at a football match in Khost province. This resumption of violence will not surprise anyone actually invested in peace for that troubled country. The point of the U.S.-Taliban deal was never peace. It was to try and cover up an ignominious exit for the U.S., driven by an election-bound president who feels no responsibility toward that country or to the broader region.

Seen from South Asia, every point we know about in the agreement is a concession by Trump to the Taliban. Most importantly, it completes a long-term effort by the U.S. to delegitimize the elected government in Kabul — and, by extension, Afghanistan’s constitution. Afghanistan’s president is already balking at releasing 5,000 Taliban prisoners before intra-Afghan talks can begin — a provision that his government did not approve.

One particularly cringe-worthy aspect: The agreement refers to the Taliban throughout  as “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan that is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” This unwieldy nomenclature validates the Taliban’s claim to be a government equivalent to the one in Kabul, just not the one recognised at the moment by the U.S. When read together with the second part of the agreement, which binds the U.S. to not “intervene in [Afghanistan’s] domestic affairs,” the point is obvious: The Taliban is not interested in peace, but in ensuring that support for its rivals is forbidden, and its path to Kabul is cleared.

All that the U.S. has effectively gotten in return is the Taliban’s assurance that it will not allow the soil of Afghanistan to be used against the “U.S. and its allies.” True, the U.S. under Trump has shown a disturbing willingness to trust solemn assurances from autocrats; but its apparent belief in promises made by a murderous theocratic movement is even more ridiculous. Especially as the Taliban made much the same promise to an Assistant Secretary of State about Osama bin Laden while he was in the country plotting 9/11.

Nobody in the region is pleased with this agreement except for the Taliban and their backers in the Pakistani military. India has consistently held that the legitimate government in Kabul must be the basic anchor of any peace plan. Ordinary Afghans, unsurprisingly, long for peace — but they are, by all accounts, deeply skeptical about how this deal will get them there. The brave activists of the Afghan Women’s Network are worried that intra-Afghan talks will take place without adequate representation of the country’s women — who have, after all, the most to lose from a return to Taliban rule.

But the Pakistani military establishment is not hiding its glee. One retired general tweeted: “Big victory for Afghan Taliban as historic accord signed… Forced Americans to negotiate an accord from the position of parity. Setback for India.” Pakistan’s army, the Taliban’s biggest backer, longs to re-install a friendly Islamist regime in Kabul — and it has correctly estimated that, after being abandoned by Trump, the Afghan government will have sharply reduced bargaining power in any intra-Afghan peace talks. A deal with the Taliban that fails also to include its backers in the Pakistani military is meaningless.

India, meanwhile, will not see this deal as a positive for regional peace or its relationship with the U.S. It comes barely a week after Trump’s India visit, which made it painfully clear that shared strategic concerns are the only thing keeping the countries together. New Delhi remembers that India is not, on paper, a U.S. “ally.” In that respect, an intensification of terrorism targeting India, as happened the last time the U.S. withdrew from the region, would not even be a violation of Trump’s agreement. One possible outcome: Over time the government in New Delhi, which has resolutely sought to keep its ties with Kabul primarily political, may have to step up security cooperation. Nobody knows where that would lead.

The irresponsible concessions made by the U.S. in this agreement will likely disrupt South Asia for years to come, and endanger its own relationship with India going forward. But worst of all, this deal abandons those in Afghanistan who, under the shadow of war, tried to develop, for the first time, institutions that work for all Afghans. No amount of sanctimony about “ending America’s longest war” should obscure the danger and immorality of this sort of exit.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 11,2020

Bengaluru, Mar 11: Did Congress party’s Man Friday, DK Shivakumar, not rise up to the occasion and save the situation for the party, whose rebel MLAs were flown into Bengaluru to unsettle the Kamal Nath-led government in Madhya Pradesh? Shivakumar told The New Indian Express on Tuesday, “So far, I have not got any clear direction on what has to be done. But I am in touch with the central leaders. The party does not want to antagonise them... They are our own MLAs.”

He said that the Tenth Schedule, which makes defections illegal, is very strong. “It is not so easy for them once they are expelled. There are courts and then they have to get re-elected. It is not easy to get minister’s post after getting re-elected,” he added.

When pointed out that rebels from the Congress and JD(S) who joined the BJP have got re-elected and become ministers, he said, “There are other issues here.”

Asked about Digvijay Singh, who is at the centre of the controversy in MP and who was AICC general secretary in-charge of Karnataka, not being able to prevent the rebellion in his home state, Shivakumar said, “I do not want to comment on any of our national leaders.”But he was confident that the Congress government would be saved in MP. “I am aware of the developments and keeping track of them,” he said.

Congress leaders seemed wiser after the event.

One of them, who wished not to be identified, said the party clearly did not see the writing on the wall. “Jyotiraditya Scindia supported the BJP at the Centre when it scrapped Article 370. Later too he was not in line with the Congress position on several issues. But during the recent Delhi violence, he criticised the BJP, sending confusing signals,” he added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 19,2020

Bengaluru, Apr 19: Former Karnataka Chief Minister H D Kumaraswamy on Sunday thanked Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa for backing his family regarding his son Nikhil s wedding, which drew flak for allegedly violating lockdown norms.

Asserting that social distancing was maintained during the wedding, the JD(S) leader in a series of tweets hit out at those accusing his family of violating lockdown norms, by stating that they were doing it out of "political hate".

"Despite maintaining social distancing and following rules during Nikhil's marriage, there are discussion that norms were not followed.

Because of political hate, poisonous comments are being made about an auspicious event, but Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa by rejecting all this is standing by the truth," Kumaraswamy said in a tweet in Kannada.

He said, "heartfelt thanks to Yediyurappa for his statement that a big political family in the state has conducted the marriage ceremony in a simple way."

Nikhil, the grandson of former prime minister H D Deve Gowda, entered wedlock on Friday at a Bidadi farmhouse with Revathi, the grandniece of former Congress minister M Krishnappa.

On the day of the marriage several posts on social media, also media reports had criticised the Gowda family for violating locdown norms and social distancing during the event.

Coming to the defence of Gowda family, Yediyurappa in response to a question on Saturday told reporters "They (family) had all the permissions and the event was held in a simple fashion. There's no need to discuss this.

"Despite having many relatives, they stuck to the limitations. For this, I congratulate them," he had said.

Stating that lockdown rules were followed during Nikhil's marriage, Kumaraswamy said, "By looking for politics in Nikhil's marriage, certain faulty minds on social media are spewing venom that is in their mind."

Gowda family had scaled down Nikhil's wedding, which was earlier planned in a 95-acre land near Ramanagara with a lavish set, with lakhs of party workers and well-wishers in attendance, followed by a grand reception in Bengaluru.

Nikhil has acted in couple of Kannada films in the lead role.

He had contested the 2019 Lok Sabha polls from the party bastion of Mandya and had lost against multilingual actress Sumalatha Ambareesh, an independent candidate supported by BJP, in a bitterly contested polls.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.