Globally, one in three women experience physical or sexual violence during their lifetime, often at the hands of an intimate partner. Despite this, marital rape remains legally unrecognized in several countries, reflecting deep-seated societal and legal biases. Marital rape, defined as any non-consensual sexual act committed by a spouse, remains shrouded in legal and cultural controversy. In many legal systems, sexual consent is still assumed within marriage, leading to the exclusion of marital rape from the definition of rape.

In India, the exception for marital rape under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) has sparked significant debate, as it enables husbands to engage in non-consensual sexual acts with their wives without legal consequences, provided the wife is over 18 years old. This exception, rooted in patriarchal traditions, has ignited debates about its constitutionality, relevance, and implications for women's rights. While some argue that criminalizing marital rape could disrupt family structures, others emphasize the urgent need to protect individual autonomy and dignity within marriage.

Defining Marital Rape: Legal Implications and Human Rights Considerations

Marital Rape: Marital rape refers to sexual intercourse or acts performed by one spouse on the other without consent. Historically, many legal systems assumed sexual consent in marriage was inherent and automatic, leading to marital rape being excluded from the definition of rape. This assumption disregards the autonomy and dignity of the spouse, making it a grave violation of personal and human rights. As legal systems evolve, the recognition of marital rape as a criminal act is vital to affirm the right to consent in all sexual relationships, regardless of marital status.

Legal Perspective on Marital Rape: Marital rape is a contentious issue within legal systems, reflecting a conflict between traditional norms and evolving notions of personal autonomy and consent. Many legal systems previously operated on the presumption of "implied consent" within marriage, asserting that a spouse owed an unconditional duty of sexual availability to the other. However, several jurisdictions have reformed their laws to criminalize marital rape, recognizing that consent is essential in all sexual relationships, even within marriage.

Countries such as the United Kingdom, South Africa, and Canada have abolished marital rape exemptions, treating it as equivalent to non-marital rape. However, in some countries like India, marital rape remains exempted from legal definitions of rape, further entrenching patriarchal attitudes that prioritize family structure preservation over the rights of individuals.

Human Rights Perspective on Marital Rape: From a human rights perspective, marital rape is a grave violation of fundamental rights, including the right to bodily autonomy, equality, and freedom from violence. International frameworks, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), affirm that all individuals, regardless of marital status, have the right to consent and protection from harm.

The refusal to criminalize marital rape reflects a failure to uphold universal human rights standards and leaves victims without legal recourse. Additionally, marital rape has profound psychological, physical, and social consequences for victims. Beyond immediate trauma, it perpetuates a cycle of silence and stigma, as victims fear retaliation or ostracization. A human rights perspective demands legal reforms that ensure access to justice, support services, and education to challenge societal attitudes that normalize such violence.

Historical Context and Evolution of Marital Rape:

In ancient Indian society, marriage was viewed primarily as a duty and obligation where the wife's role was to serve her husband, and sexual relations within marriage were not seen as a matter of consent. Religious and cultural norms, as reflected in texts like the Manusmriti, perpetuated the idea of women's subordination with little regard for their autonomy within marriage. Similarly, in Islamic and Christian traditions in India, marital sex was considered a husband's right, and the wife was expected to comply. During British colonial rule, Indian law was influenced by British common law, which, following Sir Matthew Hale's doctrine, did not recognize marital rape.

The Indian Penal Code (IPC) adopted this perspective, with Section 375 explicitly excluding marital rape from the definition of rape, unless the wife was under 18 years old. After independence, although India saw advancements in women's rights through laws against dowry and domestic violence, marital rape remained largely unaddressed. The issue persisted for decades, with the Supreme Court of India dismissing calls to criminalize marital rape in 2017, stating that the matter should be addressed by Parliament rather than the judiciary.

Legislative Perspective:

Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC)

• Definition of Rape: The Indian Penal Code, 1860, defines rape under Section 375, which states that rape is non-consensual intercourse, but excludes sexual relations between a husband and wife if the wife is over 18 years old. This exemption has become a significant focus of legal and social debates, as it allows men to force their wives into sexual relations without facing criminal charges.
   
• Resistance to Change: Efforts to criminalize marital rape in India face resistance on multiple fronts. Opponents argue that such laws might destabilize marital relationships and could be misused to target husbands unfairly. Cultural attitudes that view marriage as a private, sacred institution also contribute to the resistance, further stalling legislative progress.
   
• Advocacy and Legal Challenges: Women's rights organizations and activists have consistently challenged the exception in Section 375, arguing that it violates fundamental rights, including the right to equality (Article 14) and the right to life and dignity (Article 21). Cases like Independent Thought vs. Union of India (2017) have questioned the rationale behind the marital rape exception, but courts have deferred the matter to Parliament.
   
• International Commitments: India is a signatory to global human rights conventions, such as CEDAW, which obligates nations to criminalize all forms of gender-based violence, including marital rape. Despite these international commitments, India has yet to align its domestic laws with global standards.
   
• Current State of Law: Despite growing advocacy, marital rape remains unaddressed in Indian law. The exemption in Section 375 of the IPC persists due to strong cultural resistance and political debates prioritizing the sanctity of marriage over women's autonomy. Although some legal progress has been made through petitions and public awareness, the issue remains unresolved, and legislative change is urgently needed.

Judicial Perspective:

Marital Rape Exception Under Judicial Scrutiny

The judiciary in India has addressed the issue of marital rape cautiously, often emphasizing the need for legislative intervention rather than directly invalidating the marital rape exception in Section 375 of the IPC. Courts have acknowledged the moral and constitutional issues surrounding marital rape but have refrained from striking down the exception.

Key Judicial Cases and Observations

• Independent Thought vs. Union of India (2017): The Supreme Court ruled that sexual intercourse with a wife aged between 15 and 18 years amounts to rape, highlighting the inconsistency of the marital rape exception. However, the Court did not extend the ruling to adult women.
   
• RIT Foundation & Others vs. Union of India (2022): The Delhi High Court delivered a split verdict, with one judge declaring the marital rape exception unconstitutional, while the other upheld its validity, citing concerns about misuse. The case has been referred to the Supreme Court.
   
• Joseph Shine vs. Union of India (2018): The Supreme Court struck down Section 497, which criminalized adultery but treated women as the property of their husbands. This judgment has been cited in arguments advocating for the criminalization of marital rape.

Constitutional Values and Judicial Observations

• The judiciary has consistently analyzed marital rape through the lens of constitutional rights, particularly Articles 14 (equality), 21 (dignity), and 19 (freedom of expression). Denying a woman the right to refuse consent violates her autonomy, dignity, and personal liberty.

Judicial Concerns and Challenges

• Recognizing the need for change while highlighting challenges such as preserving marriage, preventing misuse of legal provisions, and deferring the matter to Parliament due to the sensitive nature of the issue.

Judicial Advocacy for Change

• Despite refraining from direct rulings, the judiciary has consistently urged lawmakers to address marital rape, emphasizing the need for legal reforms that prioritize women's rights while maintaining judicial objectivity.

Conclusion:
The issue of marital rape in India remains a deeply entrenched problem, rooted in outdated legal frameworks and societal norms that prioritize the institution of marriage over individual rights. The exemption for marital rape under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code violates the constitutional principles of equality, dignity, and bodily autonomy. Criminalizing marital rape is not only a matter of legal justice but a recognition of women's rights as equal citizens.

By removing the exemption, India would align its domestic laws with international human rights standards, taking a significant step toward dismantling gender-based inequalities and fostering a culture of respect and dignity within marriage. For meaningful progress, this issue must be addressed through legal reform, along with widespread awareness to ensure that the change is not merely statutory but cultural. A dual approach of legal reform and education will help build a more equitable society where all individuals, regardless of marital status, are treated with respect and dignity.

References:

• Human Rights Watch. (2019). India: Criminalize marital rape. Retrieved from https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/06/26/india-criminalize-marital-rape
• Independent Thought vs. Union of India, 2017. SC 1808.
• International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, United Nations, 1966.
• J. J. E., & G. A. (2015). Marital Rape and the legal systems in India. Journal of Family Law, 22(1), 34-56.
• Kaur, M. (2020). Legal analysis of marital rape in India. Women's Studies International Forum, 45, 41-47.
• Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, United Nations, 1979.
• RIT Foundation & Others vs. Union of India (Delhi High Court, 2022).
• Joseph Shine vs. Union of India (Supreme Court, 2018).
• Manusmriti (Brahman, 200 BCE).
• Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860, Section 375.
• R. B. (2017). Feminist approaches to legal reform on marital rape. The Feminist Legal Review, 10(2), 78-92.
• South African Law Reform Commission, (2013). Review of Sexual Offences Act. Retrieved from https://www.salc.org.za
• United Nations (2013). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights
• Verma, S. (2017). Marital rape and Indian law: A social and legal critique. Indian Journal of Gender Studies, 24(4), 15-30.
• World Health Organization (2014). Violence against women and girls: Health impacts and legal perspectives. Geneva: WHO.