The Allahabad High Court recently addressed the issue of whether sexual intercourse with a minor wife constitutes rape under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The court held that if the wife is above 16 years of age at the time of the occurrence and the sexual relations took place after the solemnization of marriage, the appellant cannot be held guilty of rape. This decision aligns with the legal position that sexual intercourse with a wife above 16 years of age, even if she is a minor, does not amount to rape under the IPC.
In the case at hand, the appellant was convicted under Sections 363, 366, and 376 of the IPC. The First Information Report (FIR) alleged that the appellant had enticed away the informant's 16-year-old daughter. Upon her recovery, medical examination and statement recording were conducted. Based on this, charges under Sections 363, 366, and 376 IPC were framed against the appellant.
The Allahabad High Court, after considering the facts and circumstances, concluded that the appellant could not be held guilty of rape. The court noted that the victim, at the time of the occurrence, was above 16 years of age, and the physical relations between the appellant and the victim occurred after the solemnization of their marriage. Therefore, the court found that the exception provided under Section 375 IPC, which excludes sexual intercourse with a wife above 16 years of age from the definition of rape, applied in this case.
This ruling is consistent with the legal framework that recognizes the exception in Section 375 IPC, which states that sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under 18 years of age, is not rape. However, it is important to note that this exception has been subject to judicial scrutiny and legislative changes over time. In 2017, the Supreme Court in the case of Independent Thought v. Union of India read down Exception 2 to Section 375 IPC, making sexual intercourse with a wife below 18 years of age punishable as rape. This decision aimed to align the IPC with the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, which defines a child as anyone below 18 years of age. However, the Supreme Court's judgment in Independent Thought was prospective in nature and did not apply retrospectively.
Therefore, the Allahabad High Court's decision in this case is in line with the legal position prevailing at the time of the occurrence, where sexual intercourse with a wife above 16 years of age did not constitute rape under the IPC. It is important to consider that legal standards and interpretations evolve over time, and subsequent rulings may impact the application of laws in similar cases.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.