The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that forcing unnatural sex on a wife and assaulting her for resisting amounts to cruelty under Section 498A IPC. However, it does not fall under Section 376 or 377 IPC.
Gwalior: Today, On May 29, The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently gave an important ruling in a case where a husband was accused of forcing his wife into unnatural sex and assaulting her when she resisted.
The Court said that although such acts do not amount to rape or unnatural offences under Sections 376 or 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), they do come under the definition of cruelty as per Section 498A of IPC.
ALSO READ: MARITAL RAPE: AN INTENTIONAL DELAY?
Justice GS Ahluwalia passed this decision while hearing a petition filed by the husband who had requested the Court to cancel the entire criminal case registered against him by his wife.
The wife had filed a complaint stating that her husband used to force her into unnatural sexual acts after drinking alcohol.
She also said that when she tried to resist or refused to consent, he used to beat her and treated her cruelly.
The accused man, through his lawyer Advocate Dr Jitendra Singh Kushwah, argued that such an act does not amount to rape when done with a wife, as Section 375 of the IPC excludes marital rape.
He further said that if the unnatural sex is not a crime under the IPC, then the cruelty charges under Section 498A should also not apply.
ALSO READ: New Criminal Laws Criticized for “Marital Rape” Exemption Clause
However, the Madhya Pradesh High Court made it clear that even if unnatural sex with a wife does not fall under the offence of rape or Section 377 IPC, the act of forcing her and then physically assaulting her when she resists is indeed cruelty.
The Court said,
“Committing unnatural sex with wife against her wishes and on her resistance, assaulting and treating her with physical cruelty will certainly fall within the definition of cruelty.”
The Court pointed out that an earlier ruling of the High Court already made it clear that such acts between a husband and wife do not come under Section 377.
Still, this does not mean the husband’s actions are free from criminal liability.
The Court noted that the wife had clearly stated that whenever she refused the unnatural acts, her husband beat her and acted cruelly.
Quoting from the judgment, the Court observed,
“Accordingly, this application is partially allowed. Offence under Section 377 is hereby quashed. However, FIR in relation to offence under Section 498A and 323 of IPC is upheld.”
In this case, Public Prosecutor Mohit Shivhare appeared for the State, and Advocate Vinod Kumar Dhakad appeared for the complainant-wife.
ALSO READ: [Marital Rape] “Potential Misuse of Laws”: NGO Files Plea in SC Against Criminalization
Read Judgement:
Click Here to Read More Reports On Marital Rape
