Delhi HC grants two weeks to Centre to state stand on criminalising marital rape

The Delhi High Court on Monday granted two weeks to the Centre to state its stand on petitions seeking criminalisation of marital rape following Solicitor General Tushar Mehtas submission that the government is neither in favour nor against striking down the immunity granted to husbands under the Indian Penal CodeMehta emphasised that a holistic view has to be taken on criminalising marital rape which is a sensitive sociolegal issue and a request for deferring further hearing was not unjustifiableHe also clarified that the Centres stand on the petitions was reflected in its last affidavit seeking time to undertake a consultative process for a decisionIt is not the central governments stand that it should either go or it should retain he saidI am saying neither The central governments stand is reflected in the last affidavit which we have filed Let it not be said that we are in favour of retaining or we are deleting it he addedA bench headed by Justice Rajiv Shakdher which is dealing with the petitions seeking to strike down the exception granted to husbands under the Indian rape law observed that the issue has to be decided either by the court or the legislature and granted two weeks to the Centre to formulate its standWe dont claim to be a repository of all wisdom but it is our job as a Constitutional court to decide a list which comes before us We dont even know what call we are going to take at the moment on the issueiquest said the bench also comprising Justice C Hari ShankarWe will give you two weeks You come back As a court it does not gel well that we keep the matter pendingiquest remarked the court which listed the case for hearing on February 21Last week the Centre had filed an affidavit urging the court to defer hearing on the petitions stating that criminalising marital rape has very far reaching sociolegal implications in the country and a meaningful consultative process with various stakeholders and state governments is neededIt had stated that the Centre was committed to protecting the liberty dignity and rights of every woman who is the fundamental foundation and pillar of a civilised society and any assistance by the government can be meaningful only after consultative process with the participation of all stakeholdersThe affidavit had said the first petition was filed in 2015 and the provisions whose validity is challenged is in existence since inception and it was only because one of the petitioners suddenly mentioned the matter for final hearing during the pandemic that the hearing has commenced leaving no time for the Centre to deliberate upon the issues and implications involved with all the stakeholders as the exercise takes a reasonable timeIn its 2017 affidavit the Centre had opposed the pleas submitting that marital rape cannot be made a criminal offence as it could become a phenomenon that may destabilise the institution of marriage and an easy tool for harassing husbandsHowever the Centre told the court in January that it was iquestrelookingiquest at its earlier stand on the petitions as that was brought on record in the affidavit filed several years agoThe court had said that the central government needs to make up its mind with respect to its position on the issue and subsequently asked it to inform whether it wished to withdraw its earlier affidavit filed in the matter in view of its latest standIt was hearing PILs filed by NGOs RIT Foundation All India Democratic Womens Association a man and a woman seeking striking down of the exception granted to husbands under the Indian rape lawThe petitioners have challenged the Constitutionality of the marital rape exception under Section 375 IPC rape on the ground that it discriminated against married women who are sexually assaulted by their husbandsThis story has been sourced from a third party syndicated feed agencies Midday accepts no responsibility or liability for its dependability trustworthiness reliability and data of the text Midday managementmiddaycom reserves the sole right to alter delete or remove without notice the content in its absolute discretion for any reason whatsoever