The many problems in the Madhya Pradesh High Court ruling

In a bizarre and appalling ruling, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that a man engaging in “unnatural sex” with his wife doesn’t amount to rape, even if it’s non-consensual, as long as the wife was not below fifteen years of age. Upon encountering this disturbing news, I couldn't help but wonder how many levels the observation and the ruling of the court were wrong.

The term "unnatural sex" would be the first point of contention. With the Supreme Court striking down the outdated aspects of Section 377, sexual activity between consenting adults was decriminalized, irrespective of their gender. Whatever was previously described as “unnatural sex” has been legal ever since. The fact that the MP High Court uses the term “unnatural sex” to refer to anal sex even in 2024 is unfortunate and problematic.

The second point of contention is the observation that the consent of the woman is immaterial in the instance of marital sex. Even though marital rape is not recognized by the Indian Penal Code (the morality of which is a separate debate), victims of domestic sexual abuse have the option to file cases under different provisions like cruelty. However, it's alarming to witness a respected institution like the High Court downplaying the significance of consent, even within the institution of marriage, especially in a country where women's safety standards are often questioned.

Thirdly, the court's disregard for the wife's consent as long as she is above fifteen years old is concerning. Given that the legal age of marriage for women in India is eighteen, it's outright reprehensible for the high court to suggest that consent only applies to wives under fifteen, potentially endorsing unlawful child marriage.

Overall, the Madhya Pradesh High Court's ruling reflects a worrying attitude towards consent and marital relations, highlighting the urgent need for legal reform and a deeper societal understanding of consent and gender rights.

Comments

Roasted

At Chico’s home ‘Mama, you promised to take me out for lunch on Sunday if I got good grades in the exams…’ seven-year-old Chico complained to his mother, Laila, as she lay confined to the comforts of her couch on a lazy Sunday morning. ‘Ugh…’ Laila groaned as she continued to scroll through reels. 'And we will go on a Sunday!’ ‘Today is Sunday, Mama!’ Chico started pulling at his mama bear’s arms. ‘Well, another one is due in seven days…’ Laila muttered, unwilling to move, but the thought of not having to cook lunch did tempt her. ‘Okay, if I promised you, you shall have it. Tell me what you want. I'll order…’ ‘No, Mama, I want to go out and dine, and I want you to take a selfie at the restaurant and post it, and I want my friends to ask me about it in class.’ Laila pulled her eyes from the screen and looked at her son. He was growing smart indeed. ‘Okay, fine, you got it. What do you want to have, though?’ ‘Roasted Chicken!’ At Durien’s Chicken Farm ‘But why can’t we go ou...

Familial Cowswami

Last day, I had the misfortune of interacting with the husband of one of my cousins at a family event. Since we’ve already established my feelings toward him, let me clarify that he is not an evil person. It’s just that our ideologies and outlooks toward life could poetically be described as Yin-Yang—completely opposite, with no common ground. That’s fine; everyone is entitled to their vision, as long as they don’t try to claim their vision as the only correct one and attempt to shove it on others who haven’t asked for advice. After exchanging pleasantries, we got down to the “real talk.” He started by asking me why I am still sticking around here (India) and not moving abroad. To set the context, he has been working in the Middle East ever since I first met him at my cousin’s wedding, around fourteen years ago. His wife and kids, who used to live with him, recently moved to Canada, possibly to settle there once he retires. Of course, moving abroad seems to be the trend (or even the no...

The Nation Needs to Know How To Hold the Government Accountable

Imagine you are visiting a cafe. You sit down at a table. A waiter offers you a menu card. You order an orange juice without sugar. Ten minutes later, the waiter returns and serves you a glass of orange juice. You take a sip. You realize that the juice has sugar. The waiter has either forgotten or ignored your request. Now, if you are someone who is uncomfortable with confrontations, you would probably curse your luck and have the juice with the added sugar. But most people would choose to raise the issue with the waiter. They asked for a product and are paying for it, and they are within every right to question if the establishment fails to provide what was promised. Forget raising the issue amicably, we have seen people taking to social media, ranting about how they have been deceived by some restaurants, who gave them chicken when they had asked for vegetarian food. Again, the customer has the right to demand what they want and hold the provider accountable if they fail to do so. Th...

can you vish?

Search This Blog