- Citation- AIR 2018 SC 4321
- Date of judgment- 27/07/2018
- Bench- Dipak MisraCJI, Indu Malhotra Judge, D. Y. Chandrachud Judge, A. N. Khanwilkar Judge, and R. F. Nariman Judge.
Facts of the Case
In 2017, a PIL was filed under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution. It challenged the constitutionality of Section 198(2) CrPC and Section 497 IPC. Section 497 IPC criminalizes adultery, committed by a man who’s engaged in sexual intercourse with another person’s wife. It exempts women from prosecution, and complain cannot be made under this section against the husband if he engages with unmarried woman. Section 198(2) CrPC species how to file a complaint for offenses committed under Section 497 and Section 498 of IPC.
Issues raised in the Case
- Whether Section 497 IPCviolates Article 14, 15(3) & 21 of the Indian Constitution?
- Whether Section 198(2) CrPCviolates Article 14, 15 & 21 of the Indian Constitution?
Arguments of Petitioners
- These provisions deprive women of Right to prosecute the husband who has committed adultery. This is against Right to Equality given under Article 14.
- The provision only punishes the adulterous man and not the woman he’s engaged with. There is no reasonable nexus on this classification and hence, it is discriminatory.
- Section 497 IPC cannot be exempted under Article 15(3), which provides for protective discrimination, as this section propagates oppression of women.
- Section 497 treats women as subordinate to men, as property of man who shall be obedient to the will of the husband. An adultery committed under Section 497, with the consent of the husband, it will be punished under the said provision.
- If two adults are voluntarily engaged into a sexual intercourse, it is unrealistic to conclude that woman was the victim and man was the ‘seducer’, consent of the woman is irrelevant.
- Section 497 IPC does not include extra marital relationship with a widow, an unmarried woman or a divorced woman.
- Sexual privacy is a part of ‘right to privacy’, and there’s a freedom to have consensual relationship outside the marriage, therefore it violates Article 21.
Arguments of Respondents
- Decriminalizing Adultery under Section 497 will disrupt the concept of family and the institution of marriage.
- Section 497 is to protect women, and comes under protective discrimination under Article 15(3).
- Article 21 does not provide the Right to have a consensual sexual relations outside marriage. Also, Article 21 is not absolute, it is subject to reasonable restrictions to protect the public interest.
- Adultery outrages the morality of the society and hence it fits well within the definition of crime.
- Adultery disrupts the sanctity of marriage, and therefore, even though committed in private, it is not a victim-less offence.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court held that Section 497 violates Article 14, 15 and 21, and is therefore unconstitutional. And since Section 198(2) CrPC, applies to Section 497 IPC, it is also unconstitutional.
- The Constitution protects an Individual’s personal choice of sexuality and intimate life, and a criminal sanction cannot be imposed on it, as it is not a crime against the society.
- Adultery is a moral wrong and Article 21 provides for right not to be subjected to punishment by the State unless it is absolutely necessary.
- Section 497 provides for a law where the sexual autonomy of the wife is surrendered to her husband, which violates the right to equality without any reasonable classification.
- It took into consideration the Reforms suggested by the Malimath Committee, to amend Section 497 to punish, whoever engages in a sexual relationship with the spouse of any other person, for the offence of adultery.
Relevant Case laws
- Yusuf Abdul Aziz v. State of Bombay and Another, AIR 1954 SC 321.
- Sowmithri Vishnu v. Union of India, AIR 1985 SC 1618.
- V. Revathi v. Union of India, (1988) 2 (SCC) 72.
- CharuKhurana and Others v. Union of India and Others, 2015(1) SCC 192
