New Delhi: Opposing the Pills related to “Marriage Rape”, the Center has told the Delhi High Court that, among others, the misuse of 498 IPCs related to dowry abuse and lack of mechanisms to verify when approval withdrawn by the wife is concern because India must Move carefully and don’t follow other countries about this problem.
This has been submitted to the court in written submission.
“Various other countries, most of the West, have criminalized marital rape but does not mean India must also follow them blindly.
This country has its own unique problems because of various factors such as literacy, the lack of financial empowerment of women’s majority, community mindset, great diversity, Poverty, etc.
and this must be carefully considered before criminalizing marital rape, “the government was submitted before.
this month.
Has shown that marriage rape is not defined in every law or law.
While rape is defined based on part 375 IPC, “defining Marital rape will call for a broad-based consensus in the community.
Regarding what marriage rape and what is not a rape of marriage needs to be defined precisely before the view of the criminalization is taken,” he said.
In evidence in such cases, the government believes that currently prosecutrix’s testimony is enough to punish accused under the 376 part of the IPC.
“Medical evidence shows injuries, signs or coloring etc.
from the body, especially on the back or chest or private, which of course can provide many improvements.
But this unfounded evidence can be considered useless if the accusation of marital rape.
It will be difficult to determine When agreement is drawn by married women.
Direct and corrobative evidence costs will be in vain if there is a marital rape, “the center said.
This center has not debated in court, which is repeatedly, including on Friday, asking when it can expect its establishment.
Last week, Lawyer General Tushar Mehta told HC that the center considered “constructive approach” to this problem and had sought advice from several stakeholders and authorities about comprehensive amendments to criminal law.
He said the criminalization of marital rape involved “family problems” and the dignity of a woman and could not be seen from the “microscopic angle” and looked for more time.
But the bench made it clearly will continue to hear other stakeholders until the center opened his argument.
In the written submission, the government has maintained that the rape of marriage is sufficiently borne in “sexual harassment” under the domestic violence definition.
Adequate violations and remedies have been provided for under action.
Furthermore, unnatural sex action between a man and his wife is also borne by part 377 IPC, highlight records.
Citing the misuse of part 498A IPC, the center said worries “from gross abuse violations of marriage rape by the wife cannot be ruled”.
It has argued that adequate procedural protection must be applied “which can only be done by the legislature if he tries to make rape rape”.
Deciphering further, it underscores that “the removal of the exception of 2 from section 375 will make a returned marriage rape, it cannot be planted and does not increase and does not stand out.
This will stop all opportunities for settlement between husband and wife who are possible under the part 498a IPC.
“This center also argues that the court” cannot seize the legislative forces “, adding that the removal of the exception of 2 of the 375 IPC section” will be similar to legislative violations that can only be carried out by the legislature in accordance with the doctrine of the separation of power prescribed in the Indian Constitution.
“