Insufficiency Of Current Laws for Marital Rape and Cruelty Under the Hindu Marriage Act

Must Read

What is the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016?

The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (“RERA”) is an Act of the Parliament. It seeks to protect...

Should the Exorbitant Amounts Charged for RT-PCR Tests be Refunded?

Introduction A plea has been filed in the Honourable Supreme Court of India seeking a refund of exorbitant amounts charged...

Should CCTV’s be Installed in the Police Station?

Introduction In a recent judgment, the bench led by Justice Nariman issued directions to both the state and Union Territory...

A Legal Analysis of the West Bengal Political Crisis on IPS Deputation

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has recently summoned three IPS officers of West Bengal (WB). The decision was...

Explained: Postal Ballot for NRIs

At the end of November 2020, Election Commission sent a proposal to the law ministry to amend the Representation...

Explained: Constitutional Provisions and Legislations With Regards to a Person with Disabilities

The world celebrates December 3 as International Day of Persons with Disabilities (IDPD). This day is also called World...

Follow us

India has become progressive about many things in recent years. However, the issue of marital rape still faces opposition and stigma. Indian society today continues to believe that marriage is a sacred institution. This significance is well placed. Although, the things that follow put significant doubt in our minds about how we perceive marriage. The high pedestal given to marriage has resulted in immense pressure on women. Society forces them to remain bound within the confines of marriage. They must do this even if they suffer sexual cruelty or other forms of brutality.

The National Family Health Survey 2005-06 sheds more light on this. It said that almost one in ten women stated that they were forced to have sexual intercourse with their husband without their consent. In India, most people do not believe in the concept of marital rape. The Hindu Marriage Act 1955 focuses a lot on sexual relations between the parties. Other personal laws suffer from the same issue. The rampant patriarchy in the country worsens the issue. This has led to severe apathy and ignorance of marital rape as a concept itself.


The origins of this thought-process about marital rape in our society come from an idea. This idea was that after the marriage, the woman gives the man irrevocable consent. It is supposed that after marriage, there is no need for consent for sexual intercourse. Nevertheless, over time, Indian thought and society have gone through an evolution. Now, some do give acknowledgement to marital rape. Judges have become conscious about the issue of marital rape. However, do the marital laws of our country support the notion of marital rape? 

Current Laws

A simple perusal of the personal laws of the country will tell us the answer. Marital rape is not recognized as a ground for divorce in India. There is no mention of the term ‘marital rape’ in any of the personal laws in India. This is including the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. There have been constant protests by women-rights activists. Despite this, the legislature does not seem interested in amending the law. The Courts have also refused to provide guidelines to the legislature

The legislature and the courts are closing their doors. Women are forced to use existing sections under the HMA to get divorced in cases of marital rape. It is essential to notice that all personal laws of India recognize cruelty as a ground for divorce. The case of Shobha Rani vs Madhukar Reddi is one of the many cases that defined cruelty. The Court has given cruelty a broad definition. It encompasses almost anything. Hence, many contest that marital rape does amount to cruelty. The argument pertains to the fact that ‘refusal to engage in sexual intercourse’ falls within cruelty. 

Specifically, under ‘mental cruelty’. So, forced sexual intercourse by the husband on the wife should also amount to cruelty. The recent cases that have come in court also support this. They have stated that forcible sexual intercourse amounts to cruelty. It is hence a ground for divorce. However, there is no specific mention of ‘sexual violence’ or ‘marital rape’ as a ground for divorce. This is leading to a rather complicated position in law. There are many instances where judges have refused to grant a divorce. They state that marital rape is not included in the Act.


Marriage entails a special relationship between two persons. It is governed by personal law. In such cases, it is of immense importance to have a corresponding civil remedy for something as sensitive as marital rape. The upbringing of the male segment of the society, in a way, gives us the justification for the existing laws. We see this in many areas, especially in the rural ones.

Parents teach male children about their dominance over women from childhood. Therefore, this thought process needs to be changed. The most important thing that needs to be done is to amend the law. The justification of this ‘societal thought process’ needs to go. Hence, the abolition of Section 377 of the IPC proves an important thing. Courts hold individual rights at a higher pedestal than societal norms. It is time for the judiciary and legislature to wake up. But, they must realise that there is a need to protect the millions of victims of marital rape. is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Parents of Road Accident Victim Entitled To Compensation: Delhi High Court

Justice JR Midha said, “Even if parents are not dependent on their children at the time of an accident, they will certainly be dependent, both financially and emotionally, upon them at the later stage of their life, as the children were dependent upon their parents in their initial years.”

Plea Challenging the AIBE Rules Framed by BCI Filed in the Supreme Court

A Writ Petition was presently filed in the Supreme Court by a newly enrolled lawyer challenging the All India Bar Examination Rules 2010 which have been framed by the Bar Council of India which mandates that an advocate has to qualify for the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) to practice law after enrollment.

Bombay High Court: Mere Presence at the Crime Scene Not Enough for Punishment

The Bombay High Court ruled that it cannot be considered a crime if a person is merely present at the crime scene which falls under the Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels and Restaurants and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women Act 2016. It also quashed two First Information Reports (FIR) against two individuals who were arrested in a raid at a dance bar by the Santacruz Police, in 2017.

CAIT Files a Plea Against WhatsApp’s New Privacy Policy in the Supreme Court

Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) has filed a petition against WhatsApp’s new privacy rules in the Supreme Court. The petition says that WhatsApp which is known to render public services by providing a platform to communicate has recently imposed a privacy policy that is unconstitutional, which not only goes against the fundamental rights of citizens but also jeopardizes the national security of our country.

RTI Activist Files a Plea in Bombay High Court Against Bharat Biotech’s Covaxin

On Saturday, a plea has been filed before the Bombay High Court by an activist stating that Bharat Biotech Covaxin had not been granted full approval but a restricted use in clinical trials according to the Drugs Comptroller General of India. The Company's phase 3 trials are ongoing and the DGCI has not made any data available in the public domain for peer- review by independent scientists.

WhatsApp Emails Delhi HC Judge Asking Her Not To Hear the Plea Challenging New Privacy Policy

The Delhi High Court raised strong objection to an E-mail sent by WhatsApp asking a judge not to hear the plea which challenges its new privacy policy. Justice Pratibha Singh said that the e-mail that was withdrawn later was totally unwarranted as she was anyway going to recuse from hearing the plea which was filed by Rohilla Chaitanya who contends that the new privacy policy of WhatsApp provides 360-degree access to a customer’s virtual activity and is against the fundamental right of privacy.

TRP Scam Case: Bombay HC Extends Protection To Arnab Goswami and Other Employees Till the Next Hearing

On Friday, the Bombay High court extended the protection that was given, to Republic TV’s Editor in Chief Arnab Goswami and other employees of ARG Outlier Media Private Limited till January 29th in the alleged case of Television Rating Point manipulation. A status report was submitted by the police to the division bench of Justices S.S.Shinde and Manish Pitale by the Police on the ongoing case.

Plea Seeks FIR Against Maharashtra Minister Dhananjay Munde in Bombay HC for False Info

A plea has been filed in Bombay High Court seeking an FIR against Maharashtra minister Dhananjay Munde who is undergoing times of trouble due to his extra-marital affair. Recently, an FIR had been lodged against Munde by a woman, accusing him of raping her sister. Munde clarified that he was actually in a relationship with that woman and had two children. He accused the two women of blackmailing him.

Writ Petition for Compensation Accepted by Calcutta High Court 

Introduction The Petitioner Purna Ch. Biswas filed a Writ Petition with the complaint that their claims for a higher quantum of compensation have not yet...

No Members Could Be Disqualified Without Authorisation by Political Party: Gujarat High Court

Excerpt The dispute application no.7 of 2020 filed by respondent no.2 before designated authority. Thereafter the designated authority order dated 28.10.2020 disqualified the petitioner and...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -