Court clarifies marital exception under IPC; quashes sections 376 and 377 charges, but maintains charges under sections 498A, 323, and 294.
In a significant ruling, the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Gwalior Bench, has quashed charges of rape and unnatural offenses under sections 376(2)(n) and 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against Shubham Mangal, in a case involving allegations of sexual violence by his wife. However, the court has allowed charges under sections 498A (cruelty), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), and 294 (obscene acts and songs) to proceed.
The judgment, delivered by Justice Rajesh Kumar Gupta, hinged on the marital exception under Section 375 IPC, which excludes sexual intercourse by a man with his wife from being classified as rape, provided the wife is not under 18 years of age. The court noted that the allegations of forced unnatural sex, while not prosecutable as rape under Section 376 IPC due to the marital exception, could still constitute cruelty under Section 498A IPC.
The case originated from a tumultuous marriage between Shubham Mangal and his wife, who accused him of multiple offenses, including forced sexual acts and physical assault. The FIR was registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Morena. The court observed that the FIR appeared to be a counterblast to ongoing matrimonial discord and divorce proceedings initiated by the husband.
The court emphasized that while the marital exception shields a husband from rape charges for acts with his wife, it does not preclude the possibility of such acts being deemed as cruelty under Section 498A IPC. The court found the medical evidence insufficient to substantiate the allegations of unnatural sex, noting the absence of injuries or definitive medical opinions.
Referring to previous judgments, including the landmark Navtej Singh Johar case, the court highlighted the evolving legal interpretations of unnatural offenses under Section 377 IPC, especially in consensual contexts. However, it reiterated the applicability of the marital exception, which continues to influence the legal landscape in India.
Despite quashing the charges under sections 376(2)(n) and 377, the court ruled that allegations under sections 498A, 323, and 294 IPC should be tried at the appropriate stage. The prosecution was deemed to have established a prima facie case for these charges, warranting further legal proceedings.
The judgment underscores the complexities of applying IPC provisions to matrimonial disputes, particularly in the context of marital rape exceptions and cruelty allegations. It also highlights the judiciary's role in balancing legal frameworks with evolving societal norms.
Bottom Line:
A husband cannot be prosecuted under Section 376 IPC for rape or under Section 377 IPC for unnatural sex with his wife due to the marital exception in Section 375 IPC. However, forced unnatural sex by a husband may amount to cruelty under Section 498A IPC.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 375, 376, 377, 498A, 323, 294 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
Shubham Mangal v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (Madhya Pradesh)(Gwalior) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2835931
