Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces

Image
Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces The Supreme Court of India has suggested that the Union Government develop a comprehensive policy addressing the construction of feeding rooms and childcare facilities  in public places. This move aims to ensure that nursing mothers and their children can access basic amenities in a dignified and private manner, reinforcing their fundamental rights under the Indian Constitution. SC Encourages Policy Formulation A bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna  and Justice N Kotiswar Singh  highlighted the absence of a structured framework to address this pressing issue. The court advised the Centre to propose a policy that could then be implemented across the states, scheduling the next hearing for December 10, 2024.   The apex court emphasized that before issuing formal directions, it was crucial to understand the Centre’s perspective on implementing the petitioner’s demand for childcare and feedi...
Post a Comment

Supreme Court Issues Notice to Centre on Marital Rape Exception Challenge in New Criminal Law

Supreme Court Issues Notice to Centre on Marital Rape Exception Challenge in New Criminal Law



The Supreme Court of India on Friday issued a notice to the Centre regarding a plea challenging the retention of the marital rape exception in the new criminal law, Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita. This significant move came as a bench headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud decided to tag the matter with an existing petition challenging the same provision under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), scheduling further hearings for July.


Petition by All India Democratic Women's Association


The plea challenging the marital rape exception was filed by the All India Democratic Women's Association (AIDWA), with Senior Advocate Karuna Nundy representing the petitioner. The AIDWA's petition is part of a broader movement seeking the removal of legal protections that currently exempt husbands from rape charges within marriage.


Background of the Issue


Several petitions have previously been filed in the Supreme Court, questioning the constitutional validity of the marital rape exception under the IPC. These petitions argue that the exception perpetuates gender inequality and violates women's fundamental rights.


Key Cases:


1. Karnataka High Court Judgement: One petition challenges a Karnataka High Court decision that declined to quash rape charges against a man accused of raping and keeping his wife as a sex slave. This case highlights the dire consequences of the marital rape exception on women's safety and autonomy.


2. Exception 2 to Section 375 IPC: Another significant petition seeks to strike down Exception 2 to Section 375 of the IPC. This exception states that sexual intercourse by a man with his wife is not considered rape unless the wife is below 15 years of age. Activist Ruth Manorama, through Advocate on Record Ruchira Goel, filed this petition, arguing that the exception is archaic and violates women's constitutional rights.


Delhi High Court's Split Verdict


The Supreme Court's current consideration follows a notable split verdict by the Delhi High Court on May 12, 2022. The two-judge bench was divided on whether to criminalize marital rape:


- Justice Rajiv Shakdher: Ruled in favor of criminalizing marital rape, asserting that the exception violates women's fundamental rights.

- Justice Hari Shankar: Disagreed, maintaining that Exception 2 to Section 375 does not violate the Constitution and is based on intelligible differences.


Legal Context and Relevant Laws


Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Section 375


Section 375 of the IPC defines rape and its exceptions. Exception 2 to this section currently exempts a husband from being charged with rape for non-consensual sex with his wife, provided she is above 15 years of age.


Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita


The Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita is a proposed new criminal law aimed at replacing the current IPC. The plea against retaining the marital rape exception in this new law reflects ongoing debates about modernizing India’s legal framework to better protect women's rights.


Legal Arguments and Implications


The legal arguments against the marital rape exception center around its inconsistency with constitutional principles of equality, dignity, and personal liberty. Petitioners argue that the exception:


- Violates Fundamental Rights: By denying married women the right to bodily autonomy and protection from sexual violence.

- Perpetuates Gender Inequality: By treating non-consensual sex differently within marriage, it undermines the principle of gender equality enshrined in the Constitution.

- Contradicts International Obligations: India's commitments under various international treaties, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), require the elimination of discriminatory practices, including those in domestic laws.


Future Proceedings


The Supreme Court's decision to issue notice to the Centre and schedule the hearing for July indicates a willingness to engage deeply with the constitutional and human rights issues surrounding marital rape. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for women's rights and gender equality in India.


Conclusion


The Supreme Court's intervention in the marital rape exception debate underscores the ongoing struggle to align India's legal framework with contemporary understandings of women's rights and gender equality. As the highest court in the country prepares to hear these crucial arguments, the potential for significant legal reform remains on the horizon.

Location: Pune, Maharashtra, India

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Supreme Court Reinforces Due Process: Curbing “Bulldozer Justice” with Strict Guidelines

Image
Supreme Court Reinforces Due Process: Curbing “Bulldozer Justice” with Strict Guidelines Background In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has set out guidelines to curb arbitrary demolitions, commonly referred to as "bulldozer justice." This term has emerged from instances where properties of individuals accused of crimes have been demolished without following due legal process. The ruling responds to several petitions highlighting the destruction of residential and commercial properties without prior notice, which, according to petitioners, targets marginalized and minority communities. Key Principles Addressed The Supreme Court’s decision rests on critical constitutional principles, particularly the rule of law, separation of powers, and protection of individual rights . The Court emphasized that no person should be punished without due process and that arbitrary action by the executive undermines citizens’ trust in the justice system. Justice Gavai, in del...
Read more

Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Former Bank Manager Accused of Defrauding Woman of ₹13 Crores

Image
Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Former Bank Manager  Accused of Defrauding Woman of ₹13 Crores  The Delhi High Court has granted bail to Varun Vashista , a former bank manager accused of embezzling over ₹13 crores from a customer’s account while working at ICICI Bank's Vikas Puri branch. The bail was approved by Justice Amit Mahajan on November 12, 2024, after considering the evidence and facts of the case.   Details of the Case The allegations against Vashista stem from his role as a branch manager. The complainant and her husband had entrusted him with managing their investments, amounting to ₹13.5 crores, between 2019 and 2023.   The complainant discovered in January 2024 that nearly ₹12 crores had been **siphoned off** from her account. Key allegations include:   - Creation of Fake Fixed Deposits: The accused reportedly created fraudulent fixed deposit accounts in the complainant’s name.   - Misappropriation of Funds: Funds were tr...
Read more

Equality Before Law

Image
                            Equality Before Law                                                   Introduction The rule of law was firstly introduced by A.V. Dicey in  his book "The Constitution Of England" in which there is rule which only prevails is law in which all are equal. In simple word if any wrong is being done which is not justifiable  by law committed by anyone that may be president, prime minister, or any individual are punishable because there is supremacy of law. Supremacy of law means the government which is power or the people who elected the government all will be treated equally before law.  Article 14 The Indian Constitution 1949, Article 14 guarantees "Equality before law The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the...
Read more