SC verdict on adultery welcomed by lawyers, activists

Agencies
September 27, 2018

New Delhi, Sept 27: The Supreme Court verdict on Thursday declaring that adultery is not a crime was welcomed by several people who said it was a good riddance to an antiquated law, though some experts raised concerns over the judgement.

A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra was unanimous in striking down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code dealing with the offence of adultery, holding it manifestly arbitrary, archaic and violative of the rights to equality and equal opportunity to women.

BJP spokesperson Nalin Kohli said that every judgement of the SC has to be welcomed because it becomes the law "which we all have to subscribe to.

"We have to look at judgements of the Supreme Court with regards to fundamental rights, whether it is equality of either men or women or everyone before the law or it is about right to privacy or it is about freedom of speech and expression.

"It has to been seen in context of this evolution. This judgement is a step in that direction. Every judgement of the SC has to be welcomed because it becomes the law which we all have to subscribe to," he said.

All India Majlis-E-Ittehadul Muslimeen president Asaduddin Owaisi raked up the issue of triple talaq, saying the Supreme Court decriminalised sections 377 and 497, but it had just "set aside" the practice of instant divorce among Muslims, and the government made it a penal offence through an ordinance.

"The Supreme Court didn't say Triple Talaaq is Unconstitutional but "set it aside "but Apex Court has said 377 & 497 is Unconstitutional will Modi Government learn from these judgments and take back their Unconstitutional Ordinance on Triple Talaaq (sic)," he tweeted.

Reacting to the judgement, social activist Brinda Adige asked if the judgement allows polygamy too? "Because we know that men very often marry two-three times and there is so much of problem when the first, second or third wife are abandoned."

"If adultery is not a crime, how is this women even going to file a case against the husband who might desert or abandon her. It's a concern," she said.

Congress leader Renuka Choudhary also sought more clarity on the issue.

"This is like criminalising the triple talaq law. They have done that but now the men will just abandon us or not give us talaq. They will have polygamy or nikah hallala which creates hell for us as women. I am glad its not a crime anymore but I do not see how it helps. The court should see across the board and give us a clarity," she said.

Other activists and lawyers hailed the judgement.

Senior Supreme Court lawyer Prashant Bhushan termed the verdict a fine judgement.

"Another fine judgement by the SC striking down the antiquated law in Sec 497 of Penal code, which treats women as property of husbands & criminalises adultery (only of man who sleeps with someone's wife). Adultery can be ground for divorce but not criminal," Bhushan said on Twitter.

Congress MP and president of women's wing of the party Sushmita Dev agreed with him.

"Excellent decision to de-criminalise adultery. Also a law that does not give women the right to sue her adulterer husband & can’t be herself sued if she is in adultery is unequal treatment & militates against her status as an individual separate entity," she tweeted.

Her party colleague Priyanka Chaturvedi lauded the verdict, saying there are some laws that need to be changed, modified or removed with time.

"It was a 150-year-old law which does not have a place in new India but at the same time we also want to note that adultery is not normal and can be a ground for divorce which in my opinion is a very fair judgement keeping in mind the country we live in and the century we are living in," she said.

Kavita Krishnan, Secretary, All India Progressive Women's Association (AIPWA) and a CPI(ML) Polit Bureau member said decriminalising adultery is welcome and was long overdue.

"Adultery is now grounds for divorce not crime. The law criminalising men for relations with some other man's wife was patriarchal, assumes wife is husband's property and has no autonomy. Good riddance #AdulteryVerdict," she tweeted.

National Commission for Women chief Rekha Sharma, too, welcomed the judgement and said it should have been removed long time ago.

"This is a law from the British era, although British had done away with it long back, we were still stuck with it," she said.

According to social activist Ranjana Kumari, "patriarchal control" over women was unacceptable. "We welcome the judgement by the SC striking down the 158yr old law based on Victorian values, in Sec 497 of Penal code, which treats women as property of husbands & criminalises adultery. Patriarchal control over women's body unacceptable," she tweeted.

The Supreme Court bench held that while adultery should not be a criminal offence it would continue to be treated as civil wrong, and can be ground for dissolution of marriage.

There can't be any social licence which destroys a home, Chief Justice Dipak Misra said.

Section 497 of the 158-year-old IPC says: "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."

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
February 21,2020

Nagpur, Feb 21: Former Maharashtra chief minister and senior BJP leader Devendra Fadnavis on Friday condemned AIMIM leader Waris Pathan's reported remarks that 15 crore Muslims are more than a match for the country's 100 crore Hindus, and asked the latter not to mistake the majority community's tolerance for weakness.

Pathan has been widely condemned for reportedly stating that "15 crore hain lekin 100 crore pe bhari hain".

He purportedly made these comments while addressing an anti-Citizenship (Amendment) Act rally in Kalaburagi in north Karnataka on February 16. The AIMIM leader has claimed he was quoted out of context.

Speaking to reporters in Nagpur, Fadnavis demanded an apology from Pathan and asked the Uddhav Thackeray government to take action.

"We condemn the statement made by Waris Pathan and demand an apology. In case he does not apologise, the state government must take action against him," he said.

Fadnavis said Pathan should understand that minorities were safe and enjoyed full freedom in India because 100 crore Hindus live in the country.

He said no one would dare utter such a statement in a Muslim-majority nation, adding that the "Hindu community is tolerant but its tolerance should not be mistaken for weakness".

"Pathan should apologise to the nation and the Hindu community," he said.

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
January 29,2020

Jan 29: Multiple organisations have called for a Bharat Bandh today in order to protest against the recently passed Citizenship Amendment Act and the proposed National Register of Citizens (NRC). The Bharat  Bandh today has been organised in Surat in Gujarat, Jharkhand and Andhra Pradesh. Increased security measures have been put in place in the three states keeping in view the call for shutdown.

According to media reports, the call for Bharat Bandh was given by Maulana Sajjad Nomani of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB). This was to protest against the controversial CAA-NRC. This call is supported by an NGO based in Surat, Versatile Minorities Forum (VMF). Apart from the VMF, the call for strikes has been supported by organizations such as Bahujan Kranti Morcha, National Association of Street Vendors of India Surat chapter and the Textile Market Workers' Union.

The workers of the VMF were also spotted distributing pamphlets and urging people to support the strike. Several shopkeepers have also put up notices stating that their shops will be shut for the day.

Earlier, Bharat Bandh was called by 10 trade unions and several bank employees in order to protest against the "anti-people policies of the government" on January 8 and 9. A few violent incidents during this Bharat Bandh were reported in West Bengal.

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
June 18,2020

New Delhi, Jun 18: The Delhi High Court Thursday asked the Delhi Police to file status report on a plea by Jamia Coordination Committee member Safoora Zargar, who was arrested under the anti-terror law --UAPA -- seeking bail in a case related to communal violence in northeast Delhi during protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act in February.

Zargar, M Phil student of Jamia Millia Islamia University, is more than four months pregnant.

Justice Rajiv Shakdher issued notice to the police and asked it to file a status report on the bail plea.

The high court listed the matter for further hearing on June 22.

Zargar, who was arrested by the Special Cell of Delhi Police on April 10, has challenged the June 4 order of the trial court denying her bail in the case.

The trial court, in its order, had said “when you choose to play with embers, you cannot blame the wind to have carried the spark a bit too far and spread the fire.”

It had said that during the course of investigation a larger conspiracy was discernible and if there was prima evidence of conspiracy, acts and statements made by any one of the conspirators, it is admissible against all.

The court had said that even if there was no direct act of violence attributable to the accused (Zargar), she cannot shy away from her liability under the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).

However, the trial court had asked the concerned jail superintendent to provide adequate medical aid and the assistance to Zargar.

The police had earlier claimed that Zargar allegedly blocked a road near Jaffrabad metro station during the anti-CAA protests and instigated people that led to the riots in the area.

It further claimed that she was allegedly part of the “premediated conspiracy” to incite communal riots in northeast Delhi in February.

Communal clashes had broken out in northeast Delhi on February 24 after violence between citizenship law supporters and protesters spiralled out of control leaving at least 53 people dead and scores injured.

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.