A husband who engages in sexual activity with his adult wife, including unnatural acts, even without her agreement, cannot be charged with rape (Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, IPC) or unnatural sex (Section 377 of the IPC), according to the Chhattisgarh High Court. Presiding over a single bench, Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas declared that a wife’s agreement to sexual activity or unnatural activities is “insignificant” in such cases.
“It is quite vivid, that if the age of wife is not below age of 15 years then any sexual intercourse or sexual act by the husband with her wife cannot be termed as rape under the circumstances, as such absence of consent of wife for unnatural act loses its importance, therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the offence under Section 376 and 377 of the IPC against the appellant is not made out,” said the HC judge.
About The Case
On December 11, 2017, a husband was charged with having unnatural sex with his wife without her will. The woman was admitted to the hospital and subsequently passed away; in her final statement, she claimed that her husband’s forced sexual behavior was the cause of her illness.
Rectal fissures were discovered during a post-mortem investigation, and peritonitis and rectal perforation were identified as the cause of death.
The husband was sentenced to ten years in prison after the trial court found him guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Sections 377, 376, and 304 of the IPC. He filed a High Court appeal.
Chhattisgarh High Court’s Reasoning
Two important points were addressed by Justice Vyas: whether Section 304 of the IPC is applicable and if Sections 376 and 377 of the IPC apply when the accused and victim are husband and wife.
The HC said that the revised definition of Section 375 IPC indicates that offenses under Section 377 IPC between a husband and wife are not applicable and that rape cannot be proven, citing Sections 375, 376, and 377 of the IPC.
The Court cited Section 375’s Exception 2, which stipulates that sexual actions or sexual contact between a man and his wife (if the wife is older than 15) does not qualify as rape. Therefore, it is not illegal for a husband to have unnatural sex with his adult wife.
The court also declared that because the parts of the body utilized for sexual activity are common, the offense between a husband and wife cannot be shown under Section 375 IPC because the offender is defined as a “man” but also a “husband” and the victim as a “woman” but also a “wife.”
Therefore, any sexual activity or conduct by the husband that involves a wife who is at least 15 years old cannot be considered rape, and the wife’s permission is no longer relevant. The court came to the conclusion that the appellant was not found guilty of any violations of Sections 376 and 377 of the IPC.
Culpable Homicide Charge Overturned
The Chhattisgarh High Court declared the conviction under Section 304 of the IPC to be “perverse,” pointing out that the trial court had not provided evidence of the prosecution’s proof or an explanation of how Section 304 applied. This conviction was reversed by the High Court.
The husband was ordered to leave custody after being found not guilty of any charges. The decision reaffirms India’s legal exemption for marital rape, igniting controversy and posing issues with women’s rights and bodily autonomy in marriage.
