Adultery no more a crime; husband is not the master of his wife: Supreme Court

News Network
September 27, 2018

New Delhi, Sept 27: In a historic judgement, the Supreme Court of India on Thursday struck down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code that made adultery a criminal offence.

A five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices RF Nariman, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra was unanimous in its judgement that held Section 497 as unconstitutional. While holding that adultery is manifestly arbitrary, the court said the act can be a ground for divorce and a person will have civil remedies for it.

The CJI and Justice Khanwilkar said, "We declare Section 497 IPC and Section 198 of CrPC dealing with the prosecution of offences against marriage as unconstitutional".

Reading out his part of the judgement, CJI Misra, who retires early next month, said mere adultery cannot be a crime, unless it attracts the scope of Section 306 (abetment to suicide) of the Indian Penal Code.

Adultery law verdict - Highlights

“Equality is the governing principle of a system. Husband is not the master of the wife,” the CJI said, adding “the magnificent beauty of the democracy is I, you and we”.

The Chief Justice noted that an unhappy marriage might not be a result of adultery but vice versa. He pointed out that adultery is not a criminal offence in countries like China, Japan and Australia.

Justice Indu Malhotra described Section 497 as “a clear violation of fundamental rights granted in the Constitution”. There is no justification for the continuation of Section 497 of IPC, she concurred.

Justice Chandrachud, on his part, said Section 497 is denial of substance of equality as it imposes “a condition on the sexuality of women by making adultery as an offence.” He held the law as a “relic of the past”.

Justice RF Nariman, meanwhile, termed Section 497 dealing with adultery as an archaic law. He concurred with the CJI and Justice Khanwilkar, describing the penal provision under the law as violative of the rights to equality and equal opportunity to women.

Section 497 of the IPC read: "Whoever has sexual intercourse with a person who is and whom he knows or has reason to believe to be the wife of another man, without the consent or connivance of that man, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, is guilty of the offence of adultery, and shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years or with fine or with both. In such case the wife shall not be punishable as an abettor."

Comments

sam
 - 
Thursday, 27 Sep 2018

Ohhh....whats going on in india under name of democracy....

Ramprasad
 - 
Thursday, 27 Sep 2018

Strange. SC promoting adultery

Unknown
 - 
Thursday, 27 Sep 2018

Soon rape will be legalised.. 

Kumar
 - 
Thursday, 27 Sep 2018

No need of marriages and SC should legalise pornography. Should start pornography industry (just like other film industry) in India like US. 

Danish
 - 
Thursday, 27 Sep 2018

Rubbish. What is the point in marriage

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 18,2020

Karnataka, Mar 18: Karnataka State Cricket Association (KSCA) has asked its administrative staff to work from home until further order amid coronavirus outbreak.

KSCA has taken various measures to mitigate the risk of spreading coronavirus. The association had already closed down all section of the sports centre and also given off to all the sports centre staff from March 14.

"Ksca had already closed down all section of the sports centre and also given off to all the sports centre staff w.e.f 14th March 2020. Further to that, now it is decided that most of the KSCA administrative staff will be working from home until further orders," KSCA Treasurer and official spokesperson Vinay Mruthyunjaya said in a statement.

"All the KSCA employees have been advised strictly to be at home and should not travel and be available on phones and mails. However skeleton staff will be deputed at KSCA to make sure ongoing works like grounds maintenance, regular maintenance etc., is not affected," 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 4,2020

Mangaluru, Apr 4: Dakshina Kannada district deputy commissioner (DC) Sindhu B Rupesh in an official reminder has ordered milk unions to disburse about 5,000 litres of milk to residents of notified and non-notified slums, construction labourers and migrant labourers and their families in shelters in the district.

A decision regarding the free distribution of milk to such needy families was taken in a meeting by the chief minister on April 1.

The DC has ordered cooperative milk unions in the district to distribute milk to such families from April 4 till April 14.

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
July 29,2020

Bengaluru, Jul 29: The Karnataka High Court’s division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice H P Sandesh today rejected an application that wanted Amulya Leona’s case to be transferred from Karnataka Police to the National Investigation Agency (NIA).

The bench, while observing that extraordinary jurisdiction can’t be exercised for transferring the case to the NIA, asked “What is so special that investigation should be transferred to NIA?”

The court, in its previous hearing, had questioned the maintainability of the petition seeking transfer of the sedition case against Leona to the NIA.

According to the petitioner, advocate Pavana Chandra Shetty, the case is a serious matter against national integration and unity and has not been investigated properly by the police. The state police also failed to file the chargesheet within 90 days, he said, and also asked for cancellation of her bail.

The bench asked the petitioner as to how a bail, already granted to a person, can be cancelled. “Is it not the indefeasible right of the accused to be released on bail if chargesheet is not filed within stipulated time? How can you make a prayer for cancellation of bail?”  the Court asked.

The counsel for the petitioner also stated that in cases of a cognizable offence, when the chargesheet is purposely not filed within the stipulated time, the matter will have to transferred to the appropriate authority.

The court responded to his contention by asking him how could the court override law and cancel the bail. “Where is the question of cancellation of bail? Can we override the law and say that bail should be cancelled?” said the bench.

Advocate Vishal Raghu had filed the petition for transfer of Leona’s case, who was accused of raising pro-Pakistan slogans at an anti-CAA rally on February 20 at Freedom Park. The advocate had blamed the probe team for not filing a chargesheet on time and has asked the state government to approach the higher court against bail granted to Leona.

Bengaluru student Amulya Leona was charged with sedition for her actions in the presence of All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen chief Asaduddin Owaisi. She was arrested by the Bengaluru police for allegedly shouting ‘Pakistan Zindabad’ slogans at an anti- CAA Protest in Bengaluru in February this year. On June 11, she was granted conditional bail by the Bengaluru civil court.

Her bail plea was earlier rejected by a Bengaluru court, after she had spent a three-month period in jail, stating that she may abscond if she is released. The sessions judge Vidhyadhar Shirahatti had also stated that if the petitioner is granted bail, she may abscond and may involve in similar offence which affects peace at large and hence her petition is liable to be rejected. The court had also noted that Amulya Leona is an influential person who may threaten and influence the witness and hamper the case in case of the prosecution and will abscond if released on bail.

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.