English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Adultery not a crime, can be a ground for divorce, says Supreme Court

Published

8 years ago

on

Adultery not a crime, can be a ground for divorce, says Supreme Court

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The Supreme Court today (Thursday, September 27) junked the 158 year old adultery law unconstitutional, holding it as oppressive to women and treating them as husbands’ property.

Section 497 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) punished a man who has an affair with a woman “without the consent or connivance of” her husband, with five years in jail or fine or both. The wife of the man having an extra-marital affair could not lodge a complaint and woman having an affair with her husband was seen as a victim and was not liable for punishment.[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1538038750464{padding-top: 10px !important;padding-right: 10px !important;padding-bottom: 10px !important;padding-left: 10px !important;background-color: #a2b1bf !important;border-radius: 10px !important;}”]According to Section 497 of IPC, “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”. Adultery presently entails imprisonment for a term which may extend up to five years, or fine, or both.[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]In four separate but concurring judgments, the Supreme Court’s five-judge Constitution bench held that Section 497 of IPC fell foul of Article 21 (Right to life and personal liberty) and Article 14 (Right to equality): the SC said it treated the woman as her husband’s property and ruled, “The husband is not the master of the wife.”

The apex court also declared Section 198(1) and 198(2) of the CrPC, which allows a husband to bring charges against the man with whom his wife committed adultery, unconstitutional.

“The wife can’t be treated as chattel and it’s time to say that husband is not the master of woman,” said the Chief Justice of India, Dipak Misra.

“Adultery can be ground for any civil wrong. There cant be any social license that destroys the matrimonial home, but adultery should not be a criminal offence,” he said. Stating that a wife was not a chattel of the husband, Misra said, “Any provision of law affecting individual dignity and equality of women invites the wrath of the Constitution. It’s time to say that a husband is not the master of wife. Legal sovereignty of one sex over other sex is wrong.”

The judges noted that most countries had abolished laws against adultery. Making adultery a crime is retrograde and would mean “punishing unhappy people”, said Justice Misra.

As he began reading out the verdict, the Chief Justice remarked that the beauty of the Constitution is it includes “the I, me and you” and “any law which dents individual dignity and equity of women in a civilised society invites the wrath of the Constitution.”

The top court, calling adultery a relic of the past, said Section 497 “denudes women from making choices.”

During arguments, the Centre had defended the law saying adultery must remain a crime so that the sanctity of marriage can be protected. The top court had then questioned how the law preserved the sanctity of marriage when the extramarital affair didn’t invite punishment if the woman’s husband stood by her.

“It’s illogical to say sexual act is not an offence if it’s done with his (husband’s) consent,” ruled the top court.

The Chief Justice said today that adultery might not be the cause of an unhappy marriage; it could be the result of one.

“In case of adultery, criminal law expects people to be loyal which is a command which gets into the realm of privacy… A man having sexual intercourse with a married woman is not a crime,” the judges felt.

The Supreme Court had upheld the legality of the crime in 1954, arguing that in adultery “it is commonly accepted that it is the man who is the seducer, and not the women.”

The Supreme Court today rejected the logic, saying, “Man being the seducer and women being the victim no longer exits. Equality is the governing principle of a system. Husband is not the master of the wife.”

“To attach criminality to something happening in the four walls of privacy is wrong. Law cannot distinguish between man and woman when both have equal role,” the SC added.

“Sexual autonomy of woman cannot be compromised. It’s a result of patriarchal society. It’s her right and there cannot be any condition imposed on her. Chastity is not for woman alone as it is also equally applicable to husband,” the court said.

Last year, in response to the petition challenging the law, the court had said it treats a woman as her husband’s subordinate and time had come for society to realise that a woman is as equal to a man in every respect.

Justice RF Nariman termed Section 497 archaic and concurred with the judgment of the CJI and Justice AM Khanwilkar, saying the penal provision was violative of the rights to equality and equal opportunity to women. Justice DY Chandrachud said Section 497 destroyed and deprived women of dignity. “Section 497 is based on gender stereotypes of the role women. The provision is unconstitutional,” Chandrachud said.

Saying that Section 497 also deprived a woman of her privacy, he said, “Society has two sets of standards for judging the morality of men and women. The law is gender biased, gives unequal voice to partners.”

Justice Indu Malhotra, the lone woman judge on the bench, said that Section 497 was a clear violation of fundamental rights granted in the Constitution and there was no justification for the continuation of the provision.

The five-judge bench of the Supreme Court had reserved judgment on August 8, saying that making adultery a penal offence would be irrational and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

The petition seeking the repeal of Section 497 IPC was filed by a non-resident Keralite — Joseph Shine — who termed the 158-year-old law enacted by the Britishers as “unjust, illegal and arbitrary and violative of citizens’ fundamental rights”. Questioning the gender bias in the provision drafted by Lord Macaulay in 1860, Shine has also challenged Section 198(2) of the CrPC.

On January 5, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, referred the PIL to a larger constitutional bench. The bench had contended the provision seemed “quite archaic, especially when there is societal progress”. In three earlier judgments in 1954, 1985 and in 1988, the court had upheld the provision.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

India News

Amit Shah counters delimitation concerns, says southern states to gain Lok Sabha seats

Amit Shah assures Parliament that southern states will gain Lok Sabha seats after delimitation, countering opposition criticism during the women’s reservation debate.

Published

9 hours ago

on

April 16, 2026

By

Amit Shah

Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Thursday addressed concerns over the proposed delimitation exercise, asserting in the Lok Sabha that southern states will not lose representation but instead see an increase in their number of seats.

His remarks came during a heated debate linked to the implementation of women’s reservation, where opposition parties have raised fears that population-based delimitation could reduce the political weight of southern states.

Shah rejected these claims, calling them misleading, and said the proposed framework ensures fairness while expanding the overall strength of the Lok Sabha.

Seat count to rise with expansion of Lok Sabha

The government has indicated that the total number of Lok Sabha seats could increase significantly as part of the delimitation process. In this expanded House, the combined representation of southern states is expected to rise from 129 seats at present to around 195 seats.

Shah emphasised that no state will lose seats in absolute terms, and the exercise is designed to reflect population changes while maintaining balance across regions.

State-wise projections shared in Parliament

During his address, Shah also provided indicative figures for individual southern states, suggesting notable increases in representation. According to the projections:

  • Tamil Nadu could see its seats rise substantially
  • Kerala, Telangana, and Andhra Pradesh are also expected to gain additional seats
  • Karnataka’s representation may increase as well

These figures were presented to counter the argument that delimitation would disproportionately favour northern states.

Political debate intensifies over linkage with women’s quota

The delimitation exercise has been closely linked to the rollout of women’s reservation, which proposes one-third seats for women in Parliament and state assemblies.

Opposition leaders have questioned this linkage, arguing that tying reservation to delimitation could delay its implementation and raise federal concerns. Some leaders have also warned that the move could impact national unity if apprehensions among states are not addressed.

The government, however, maintains that the reforms are necessary to ensure equitable representation and to align the electoral system with demographic realities.

Centre dismisses ‘false narrative’ on southern states

Shah reiterated that concerns about southern states losing influence are unfounded. He said the delimitation process will increase representation across regions and described the criticism as a “false narrative” aimed at creating confusion.

The issue is expected to remain a key flashpoint as Parliament continues discussions on the women’s reservation framework and related legislative changes.

Continue Reading

India News

PM Modi assures no discrimination in women’s quota, delimitation debate intensifies in Parliament

PM Narendra Modi has assured that women’s reservation will be implemented without discrimination, amid a heated debate over delimitation in Parliament.

Published

16 hours ago

on

April 16, 2026

By

PM modi

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has assured that there will be no discrimination in the implementation of women’s reservation, as Parliament witnessed a sharp debate over the proposed linkage between the quota and delimitation exercise.

During the ongoing special session, the government reiterated its commitment to ensuring fair representation while addressing concerns raised by opposition parties regarding the timing and structure of the legislation.

The proposed framework aims to reserve 33 percent of seats for women in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies. However, its implementation is tied to a fresh delimitation exercise, which is expected after the next census.

Opposition questions timing and intent

Opposition leaders have raised concerns that linking the women’s quota to delimitation could delay its implementation. They argue that the process of redrawing constituencies may push the actual rollout further into the future.

The issue has triggered a broader political confrontation, with multiple parties questioning whether the move could alter representation across states.

Some critics have also alleged that the delimitation exercise could disproportionately benefit certain regions based on population, a charge the government has rejected.

Government reiterates commitment to fair implementation

Responding to these concerns, the Centre has maintained that the reforms are necessary to ensure accurate and updated representation based on population data.

Leaders from the ruling side have repeatedly emphasized that the process will be carried out transparently and without bias. The assurance that there will be “no discrimination” is aimed at addressing fears among states and opposition parties.

The debate marks a key moment in Parliament, with both sides engaging in intense exchanges over one of the most significant electoral reforms in recent years.

Continue Reading

India News

Give all tickets to Muslim women, Amit Shah says, attacking Akhilesh Yadav on sub-quota demand

A sharp exchange between Amit Shah and Akhilesh Yadav in Parliament over sub-quota for Muslim women highlights key divisions on women’s reservation implementation.

Published

18 hours ago

on

April 16, 2026

By

A heated exchange broke out in Parliament during discussions on the women’s reservation framework, with Union Home Minister Amit Shah and Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav locking horns over the demand for a sub-quota for Muslim women.

The debate unfolded as the government pushed forward key legislative measures to implement 33% reservation for women in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies.

Akhilesh Yadav argued that the proposed reservation must ensure representation for women from marginalised communities, including Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and Muslim women. He said that without such provisions, large sections could remain excluded from political participation.

He also questioned the timing of the bill, alleging that the Centre was avoiding a caste census. According to him, a census would lead to renewed demands for caste-based reservations, which the government is reluctant to address.

Government rejects religion-based quota

Responding to the demand, Amit Shah made it clear that reservation based on religion is not permitted under the Constitution.

He stated that any proposal to provide quota to Muslims on religious grounds would be unconstitutional, firmly rejecting the idea of a separate sub-quota for Muslim women within the broader reservation framework.

The government has maintained that the existing framework already includes provisions for Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) women within the overall reservation structure.

Wider political divide over implementation

The issue of sub-categorisation within the women’s quota has emerged as a major flashpoint, even as most opposition parties broadly support the idea of women’s reservation.

Samajwadi Party leaders reiterated that their support for the bill depends on inclusion of OBC and minority women, while the government continues to defend its constitutional position.

The debate is part of a broader discussion during the special Parliament session, where multiple bills linked to delimitation and implementation of the women’s quota are being taken up.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com