The Karnataka High Court has refused to quell rape costs filed by a spouse towards her husband, ruling that the wedding doesn’t confer any particular male privilege or a license for unleashing a “brutal beast” on the spouse.

Justice Nagaprasanna refused the person’s plea to drop the rape costs on the bottom that part 375 doesn’t criminalise intercourse between a person and his spouse, even whether it is pressured. Photo courtesy: Wikimedia

“Institution of marriage does not confer, cannot confer and in my considered view, should not be construed to confer, any special male privilege or a license for unleashing of a brutal beast. If it is punishable to a man, it should be punishable to a man albeit, the man being a husband,” justice M Nagaprasanna stated in his verdict, declining to just accept the husband’s plea that he can’t be tried for marital rape beneath the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

“In my considered view, such an argument cannot be countenanced. A man is a man; an act is an act; rape is a rape, be it performed by a man the “husband” on the girl “wife”,” the bench identified.

In March 2017, the girl accused her husband of sodomy, aggravated sexual harassment assault of her 9-year-old daughter, home violence, inflicting damage. On finishing their investigation, the police added part 376 of IPC which pertains to punishment for rape, and sections 5 (m) and (l) and part 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, which relate to repeated penetrative sexual assault.

The trial court docket ultimately framed costs for rape, cruelty by husband and felony intimidation, prompting the person to attraction towards the subordinate court docket’s determination.

Justice Nagaprasanna refused the person’s plea to drop the rape costs on the bottom that part 375 doesn’t criminalise intercourse between a person and his spouse, even whether it is pressured.