July 16, 2026 11:35 am (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
'He could die in two days': Delhi HC plea seeks force-feeding of Sonam Wangchuk as fast enters Day 18 | 'Tonight's defeat is hard to take': Emmanuel Macron reacts after France crash out of World Cup, congratulates Spain | Spain cruise past France to storm into FIFA World Cup 2026 final with clinical 2-0 victory | Taslima Nasrin announces Kolkata return after 20 years to attend literary event at Rabindra Sadan | 'We must not watch one of our greatest minds be sacrificed': Zeenat Aman backs Sonam Wangchuk, urges govt to open dialogue | 'I don't want Phunsukh Wangdu to die': '3 Idiots' star Omi Vaidya's emotional appeal for Sonam Wangchuk | Middle East Crisis: Iran strikes UAE tankers in Strait of Hormuz, Indian crew member killed | Picnic turns into horror: Woman allegedly harassed, family chased for 15 km in Nashik | 'Mannat is a private property': Supreme Court clears renovation of Shah Rukh Khan's Bandra residence | Bengal CM Suvendu Adhikari backs move to stop entry to Bankra Mosque inside Kolkata airport operational area
Marital Rape

Marital rape split verdict challenged in Supreme Court

| @indiablooms | May 17, 2022, at 06:26 pm

New Delhi/UNI: A petition was moved in the Supreme Court Tuesday challenging a Delhi High Court's split verdict on the criminalisation of marital rape.

Khushboo Saifi, one of the original petitioners in the high court, had filed the application that was registered by the apex court Tuesday.

On May 11, a two-judge bench of the Delhi High Court, headed by Justice Rajiv Shakdher and comprising Justice C Hari Shankar, passed the split verdict on a batch of petitions seeking to do away with Exception 2 of the rape law under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code.

The exception sets that forcible sexual intercourse by a man with his wife is not rape unless the wife is below 15 years of age.

Justice Shakdher had held that the exception was "unconstitutional".

"The impugned provisions in so far as they concern a husband having intercourse with his wife without consent are violative of Article 14 [right to equality] and are struck down," he said in his judgement.

However, Justice Shankar said he disagreed and refused to do away with immunity bestowed on husbands. Justice Shankar upheld the validity of sections 376B (sexual intercourse by husband upon his wife during separation is punishable) and 198B (no court shall take cognizance of an offence punishable where the persons are in a marital relationship).

Saifi pleaded with the Supreme Court for a relook seeking criminalising marital rape case.

She is the first petitioner to knock the doors of the top court challenging the high court's verdict.

She supports Justice Shakdher's verdict and challenges Justice Shankar's.

Support Our Journalism

We cannot do without you.. your contribution supports unbiased journalism

IBNS is not driven by any ism- not wokeism, not racism, not skewed secularism, not hyper right-wing or left liberal ideals, nor by any hardline religious beliefs or hyper nationalism. We want to serve you good old objective news, as they are. We do not judge or preach. We let people decide for themselves. We only try to present factual and well-sourced news.

Support objective journalism for a small contribution.