Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is a law that deals with the offense of adultery. Adultery is defined as voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and someone other than their legal spouse. This offense is punishable by imprisonment of up to five years, or with a fine, or with both.
The provision of section 497 IPC has been controversial and has faced criticism for being discriminatory against women. Under the law, only a man can be punished for committing adultery, while a woman is considered as the victim and is not punishable. This means that a woman cannot be charged with adultery, even if she is willingly involved in a sexual relationship with a married man. This has been seen as a gender bias, as it holds women to a different standard and does not treat them as equally responsible for the offense.
Another criticism of section 497 IPC is that it does not recognize the agency of women and treats them as passive objects. The provision allows a man to file a complaint against his wife's alleged lover, but does not allow a woman to file a complaint against her husband's alleged lover. This reinforces the notion that women do not have control over their own actions and are dependent on men.
There have been efforts to reform the provision of section 497 IPC to make it more gender-neutral and to recognize the agency of women. In 2018, the Supreme Court of India struck down section 497 IPC as unconstitutional and discriminatory against women. The court held that the provision was violative of the right to equality under the Indian Constitution, and that it treated women as "chattel" and "property" of their husbands. The court also observed that the provision was based on outdated notions of marriage and did not reflect the realities of modern society.
In conclusion, section 497 IPC is a controversial provision that has been criticized for its gender bias and lack of recognition of the agency of women. While efforts have been made to reform the law, it remains to be seen how these reforms will be implemented and whether they will effectively address the issues with the provision.
धारा 497 क्या है
Most cultures make both men and women equally liable but in case of ancient Hindu law, only the female adulteress spouse would be punished and not the male adulterer. In such cases the wife shall not be liable for anything and will not be punished even as an abettor. Therefore, it being repealed was a necessity and the same has been done by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The court examined that basically the woman here is the victim. Adultery is almost 160 years old law which was made by the British. Union of India The court in this An analysis of Section 497 of the IPC Section 497 of the IPC gave a husband the exclusive right to prosecute the person with whom the wife committed adultery by indulging in sexual intercourse with him. Union of India on 27 September, 2018: In this case it was held that Section 497 of IPC criminalised the offence of adultery, but only a man is liable to be punished for the offence.
The Supreme Court struck down the adultery law under Section 497 IPC : Is it justified
Justice Chandrachud added that a woman does not pledge her sexual autonomy to her husband after marriage and any provision depriving a woman of the choice to have consensual sex with anyone outside the marriage needs to be struck down. It's like when someone steals away a property of another person the kind of misery the latter goes through in such a situation, similar is the case here. It's clear as to why this archaic law was to go from the statute book once and for all. This is, however, one perspective of looking at this provision. Analysis of decriminalising adultery Although marriage is a both a civil contract and a sacrament, it is not a standard form of contract. The subsequent criminalisation of adultery raised further questions on the validity of this provision. हमारी रिफंड और कैंसलेशन पालिसी देखे LawRato.
Law discriminates against men When sexual intercourse takes place with the consent of both parties, there is no good reason to exclude the wife and prosecute only her adulterer. The law identifies the married man as the victim because the offence of adultery is looked as an offence against husband. According to this section, the aggrieved man, whose wife has performed this crime, can file a case against the other man involved. Meanwhile I met this guy and we both fall in love. की धारा 497 को चुनौती देती है, जो एक विवाहित महिला के साथ व्यभिचार में एक पुरुष के खिलाफ मुकदमा चलाने की ओर ले जाती है, लेकिन महिला को दण्डित नहीं करती है। उन्होंने याचिका में आई.
However, over the past years, the husband was mentally abusing to the wife. My girlfriend was married to her ex partner in india 9 years ago and they both came to New Zealand 2. Further, if the husband of the woman gives his consent for sexual intercourse with another man, no offence lies. As proof Husband has public photos, but not of close nature , and also proof that wife and the respondent-B traveled and checked into hotel together. Adultery is no longer a crime Punishment for Adultery is unconstitutional, the important judgment on Adultery is delivered by Supreme Court. No doubt that the law, as it stands, is inadequate.
It was only in 1955 that Hindu Marriage Act came into existence and mentioned Adultery as a ground for divorce. CEO, ONDC The petitioners wish to address a few problems connected to Section 497 of IPC as explained hereunder. I have noted that you have already initiated proceedings against your husband under Ss. This clearly reflects the element of consent of the woman involved in the act of sexual intercourse with another man. How this law was struck down is discussed ahead, but before that we should see the how it all began. The bench that pronounced the recent judgment consisted of five judges including the Chief Justice Dipak Misra, and Justices R F Nariman, A M Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra. The man committing such an offense can be imprisoned for five years or more and can also be asked to pay a fine.
The apex court is hearing a petition filed by one Joseph Shine who has challenged the constitutionality of Section 497 of the IPC read with Section 198 2 of the Criminal Procedural Code CrPc , which deals with prosecution, for offences against marriages. This could, however, change, with the Supreme Court agreeing to revisit the provision. Thus, Section burdens man alone for the offence and grants immunity to wife by treating her as a victim according to prevalent social norms. Centre, on the other hand, argued that adultery is an intentional action which impinges on the sexual fidelity and sanctity of marriage. His consent or connivance decides whether the offence of adultery is committed or not.
We were in physical relationship,he promised to marry but now he refuses meanwhile he assault me ,taken a lot of money which he refuses to return back. The court also examined that this right was giving power to the husband to treat his wife like a property. A number of people call this an anti-woman law since the law seems to reduce a woman as a mere object. Now, we should dive deep into the section and understand the real meaning behind it. Because even if the woman would be at fault, the punishment for the offence of Adultery would be only given to the men as there exists a notion that women can do no wrong and she.
Under Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code IPC Adultery was an offenceand a convict could be sentenced to five-year-jail term. The Supreme Court on the question of passing a judgement for a new, gender-neutral adultery offence, remarked that subjecting interpersonal relationships to the severity of criminal law would amount to an intrusion into the right to privacy guaranteed under The decision of the Supreme Court was lauded across horizons from lawyers to activists welcoming the decision of striking down the antiquated law treating women as the properties of their husbands. There are no reasons whatsoever to continue this law that does not serve the intended purpose. It traces the history of the provision which has discriminatory roots. The wife has a life and dignity of her own. You can click on this link and join: Follow us onÂ. What is crucial to this perspective is that the section does not provide any punishment for the unfaithful wife and only provides for the punishment to the man who indulged in sexual intercourse with the married women.
