Conviction under Section 497 IPC set aside following Supreme Court's declaration of the provision as unconstitutional in Joseph Shine v. Union of India
In a landmark decision, the Delhi High Court has acquitted Kamal Kapoor, who was previously convicted under Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for adultery. The judgment, delivered by Justice Vimal Kumar Yadav on May 11, 2026, aligns with the Supreme Court's precedent set in the 2019 case of Joseph Shine v. Union of India, which declared Section 497 unconstitutional for violating fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Indian Constitution.
The case, which has been under scrutiny due to its complex socio-cultural implications, involved a controversial arrangement reminiscent of the ancient 'Niyog Pratha.' The complainant had alleged that the appellant, Kamal Kapoor, raped her with the assistance of his wife. However, the prosecutrix and her husband had initially consented to the arrangement to conceive a child, as the husband was unable to procreate.
Despite the allegations, the court found that Kapoor and his wife were not guilty under Sections 376 and 384 IPC, which deal with rape and extortion respectively. The conviction under Section 497 for adultery was the sole remaining charge, which the court has now overturned.
Justice Yadav's judgment emphasized the binding nature of the Supreme Court's ruling in Joseph Shine v. Union of India. The apex court had concluded that Section 497 IPC was discriminatory and unconstitutional, thereby nullifying its application in subsequent cases. This decision was reinforced by the retrospective effect of the judgment, which necessitated Kapoor's acquittal.
The court's decision marks a significant shift in legal interpretations of personal relationships and highlights the evolving nature of Indian jurisprudence concerning individual rights and gender equality. The judgment underscores the principle that laws deemed unconstitutional cannot form the basis of criminal convictions.
The acquittal has been welcomed by legal experts as a reaffirmation of constitutional rights and the judiciary's role in upholding justice. The court ordered the discharge of bail bonds and the return of original documents filed by the surety, thereby concluding the legal proceedings in this appeal.
Bottom line:-
Conviction under Section 497 IPC set aside due to its declaration as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of India in Joseph Shine v. Union of India.
Statutory provision(s):
Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 497; Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution of India; Article 141 of the Constitution of India; Section 198(2) Cr.P.C.
Kamal Kapoor v. State, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2898801
