New Delhi:
The Supreme Court today made the National Commission for Women (NCW) a party to
a PIL challenging constitutional validity of a provision in rape laws that
permits "intrusive sexual intercourse with a girl child aged between 15 to
18 years" by the husband.
"There is a substance in it," a social justice bench comprising justices Madan B Lokur and UU Lalit said and ordered that the Secretary of NCW to be made a party.
The plea referred to Exception 2 to Section 375 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that says that sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under 15 years of age, is not rape. It also cites other laws having contradictory views on marital rape of minor girl.
"There is a substance in it," a social justice bench comprising justices Madan B Lokur and UU Lalit said and ordered that the Secretary of NCW to be made a party.
The plea referred to Exception 2 to Section 375 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that says that sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under 15 years of age, is not rape. It also cites other laws having contradictory views on marital rape of minor girl.
The court
was hearing a PIL filed by NGO 'Independent Thought' through its founder Vikram
Srivastava.
The plea has sought a declaration that Exception 2 to Section 375 of the IPC was "violative of Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution to the extent that it permits intrusive sexual intercourse with a girl child aged between 15 to 18 years only on the ground that she has been married."
It also referred to the provisions of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) and said that these provisions were contrary to the IPC provision.
The POCSO provision provides that sexual intercourse with a minor constitutes the offence of rape and it does not exclude such relationship between a man and minor wife.
The plea has highlighted the anomalies among various law and also cited one of the provisions of the CrPC that says: "No court shall take Cognizance of an offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), where such offences consists of sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife, the wife being under eighteen years of age, if more than one year has elapsed from the date of the commencement of the offence."
The plea has sought a declaration that Exception 2 to Section 375 of the IPC was "violative of Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution to the extent that it permits intrusive sexual intercourse with a girl child aged between 15 to 18 years only on the ground that she has been married."
It also referred to the provisions of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) and said that these provisions were contrary to the IPC provision.
The POCSO provision provides that sexual intercourse with a minor constitutes the offence of rape and it does not exclude such relationship between a man and minor wife.
The plea has highlighted the anomalies among various law and also cited one of the provisions of the CrPC that says: "No court shall take Cognizance of an offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), where such offences consists of sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife, the wife being under eighteen years of age, if more than one year has elapsed from the date of the commencement of the offence."
