{"id":34613,"date":"2018-10-31T12:12:13","date_gmt":"2018-10-31T06:42:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blog.forumias.com\/?p=34613"},"modified":"2018-10-31T12:12:13","modified_gmt":"2018-10-31T06:42:13","slug":"the-legal-message","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/the-legal-message\/","title":{"rendered":"The legal message:\u00a0"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.thehindu.com\/todays-paper\/tp-opinion\/the-legal-message\/article19857410.ece\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The legal message<\/span><\/a><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">:\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p><b>Context<\/b><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Recent Supreme Court\u2019s decision on criminalising sex between a man and his minor wife, while the court refrained from adjudicating on the larger issue of marital rape<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Removing the current marital exception to rape will also have an important signalling effect<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><b>About the recent ruling<\/b><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Sexual Intercourse with a girl below 18 years of age is rape, regardless of whether she is married or not.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The exception carved out in section 375 of the Indian Penal Code creates an artificial distinction between a married girl child and an unmarried girl child.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The exception clause took away the right of a girl child to bodily integrity and reproductive choice.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Exception 2 to Section 375 of the IPC now states that sexual intercourse or acts with a man with his own wife, not being under eighteen years of age, is not rape.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><b>Section 375 vs Constitution<\/b><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Exception 2 to Section 375 (which defines rape) of the IPC (as amended by the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013), as violative of Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Article 14 Equality before law<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Article 15 \u00a0Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them, be subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Article 21 \u00a0\u201cNo person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to a procedure established by law.\u201d<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Article 21 can only be claimed when a person is deprived of his \u201clife\u201d or \u201cpersonal liberty\u201d by the \u201cState\u201d as defined in Article 12.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>Article 21 secures two rights:<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Right to life<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Right to personal liberty<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Article prohibits the deprivation of the above rights except according to a procedure established by law<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><b>Verma committee recommendations on marital rape<\/b><\/p>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Justice Verma Committee was constituted to recommend amendments to the Criminal Law so as to provide for quicker trial and enhanced punishment for criminals accused of committing sexual assault against women. \u00a0The Committee submitted its report on January 23, 2013.<\/span><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><b>On rape<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> \u00a0&#8212; The IPC differentiates between rape within marriage and outside marriage. \u00a0Under the IPC sexual intercourse without consent is prohibited. \u00a0However, an exception to the offence of rape exists in relation to un-consented sexual intercourse by a husband upon a wife. \u00a0The Committee recommended that the exception to marital rape should be removed. \u00a0Marriage should not be considered as an irrevocable consent to sexual acts. \u00a0Therefore, with regard to an inquiry about whether the complainant consented to the sexual activity, the relationship between the victim and the accused should not be relevant. \u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><b>On sexual assault <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">&#8212; The Committee recommended that non-penetrative forms of sexual contact should be regarded as sexual assault. \u00a0The offence of sexual assault should be defined so as to include all forms of non-consensual non-penetrative touching of a sexual nature. \u00a0The sexual nature of an act should be determined on the basis of the circumstances. \u00a0Sexual gratification as a motive for the act should not be prerequisite for proving the offence. \u00a0The offence should be punishable with 5 years of imprisonment, or fine, or both. Use of criminal force to disrobe a woman should be punishable with 3 to 7 years of imprisonment. \u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><b>On Sexual harassment<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> &#8212; \u00a0Some of the key recommendations made by the Committee on the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Bill, 2012 that is pending in Parliament are provided below:<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Domestic workers should be included within the purview of the Bill. <\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Under the Bill the complainant and the respondent are first required to attempt conciliation. \u00a0This is contrary to the Supreme Court judgment in Vishakha vs. State of Rajasthan which aimed to secure a safe workplace to women. <\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The employer should pay compensation to the woman who has suffered sexual harassment.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Bill requires the employer to institute an internal complaints committee to which complaints must be filed. \u00a0Such an internal committee defeats the purpose of the Bill and instead, there should be an Employment Tribunal to receive and adjudicate all complaints.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ol start=\"4\">\n<li><b>On Child sexual abuse<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> &#8212; The Committee has recommended that the terms \u2018harm\u2019 and \u2018health\u2019 be defined under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 to include mental and physical harm and health, respectively, of the juvenile. <\/span><\/li>\n<li><b> Punishment for crimes against women<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> &#8212; The Committee rejected the proposal for chemical castration as it fails to treat the social foundations of rape. \u00a0It opined that death penalty should not be awarded for the offence of rape as there was considerable evidence that death penalty was not a deterrence to serious crimes. \u00a0It recommended life imprisonment for rape.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Causes of high cases of marital rape in India<\/b><\/p>\n<ol>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Patriarchal mindset<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Inequality in society<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Sexual dissonance between couple<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Domestic issues<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Attempt of women to demand her right in marital relationship<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Economic dependence over husband<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Absence of legal procedure to recognize marital rape<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><b>Conclusion<\/b><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">UN multi-country study on violence in Asia-Pacific which recommended that strategies must focus on structural factors that prevent the incidence of rape, rather than focussing only on strengthening response mechanisms. <\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Therefore, in addition to sensitising law enforcement authorities whose attitudes are merely symptomatic of widely-held beliefs about women and gender roles, we need to work with children, parents and the larger community to ensure marital rape is condemned, not condoned.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Effects of developed and developing countries policies<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The legal message:\u00a0 Context Recent Supreme Court\u2019s decision on criminalising sex between a man and his minor wife, while the court refrained from adjudicating on the larger issue of marital rape Removing the current marital exception to rape will also have an important signalling effect About the recent ruling Sexual Intercourse with a girl below&hellip; <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/the-legal-message\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">The legal message:\u00a0<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":61,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[555],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-34613","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-test-1","entry"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","views":{"total":0,"cached_at":"","cached_date":1704554830},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/34613","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/61"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=34613"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/34613\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=34613"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=34613"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/forumias.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=34613"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}