Can the Marital Rape Exception Immunize a Husband?

The debate surrounding the marital rape exception (MRE) in India has intensified following recent judicial developments, particularly a ruling by the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The issue raises a complex constitutional and criminal law question: Can the marital rape exception shield a husband from prosecution for non-consensual sexual acts, especially those earlier classified as “unnatural offences”?

This question has gained renewed significance due to:

• The transition from the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 to the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023

• Expanding constitutional interpretations of dignity, bodily autonomy, and privacy under Article 21

• Ongoing judicial scrutiny of marital rape laws in India

This article critically examines whether the marital rape exception can extend beyond rape to negate liability under other independent sexual offences.

Background: Madhya Pradesh High Court Ruling

In M.Cr.C. No. 54650 of 2023, the Madhya Pradesh High Court quashed charges against a husband under:

• Section 376 IPC (Rape)

• Section 377 IPC (Unnatural Offences)

The Court relied on Exception 2 to Section 375 IPC, reasoning that:

• The 2013 amendment expanded rape to include non-procreative penetrative acts.

• If marital rape exception removes rape liability, then prosecuting similar acts under Section 377 would be inconsistent.

However, this reasoning has triggered serious doctrinal and constitutional debate.

Legal Framework: IPC to BNS Transition

1. Marital Rape Exception under IPC

After the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013, Section 375 IPC expanded rape to include:

• Vaginal penetration

• Anal penetration

• Oral penetration

• Object or body part penetration

But Exception 2 to Section 375 IPC stated:
Sexual intercourse by a man with his wife (above specified age) is not rape.

Later, courts interpreted minimum age as 18 years.

2. Marital Rape Exception under BNS 2023

Under Section 63 BNS, rape is similarly defined and marital immunity continues in modified language. Thus, the core structure of marital exception remains.

Status of Unnatural Offences (Section 377 IPC)

Section 377 IPC earlier criminalized:
“Carnal intercourse against the order of nature.”

After the Supreme Court judgment in Navtej Singh Johar (2018):

• Consensual adult same-sex relations → Decriminalized

• Non-consensual acts → Still punishable

• Acts involving children/animals → Still punishable

Under BNS 2023:

• Section 377 is repealed

• But continues to matter for pre-BNS cases and ongoing trials

Judicial Reasoning Adopted by Some High Courts

Some High Courts (MP, Delhi, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, Allahabad) followed logic:

1. 2013 amendment expanded rape definition.

2. Many acts earlier under Section 377 now fall under rape.

3. If rape doesn’t apply due to MRE → Section 377 shouldn’t apply.

4. Section 375 overrides Section 377 where overlap exists.

However, this reasoning is legally controversial.

Doctrinal Errors in Extending Marital Rape Exception

Error 1: Treating Offence-Specific Exception as Universal Immunity

Marital rape exception only says:
➡ Act is “not rape”
It does NOT say act is:

• Lawful

• Consensual

• Non-criminal

Criminal law principle:
Exceptions apply only to the offence they are attached to.

IPC and BNS structurally separate:

• General exceptions (apply to all offences)

• Offence-specific exceptions (apply only to one offence)

Thus, rape exception cannot automatically cancel liability under other offences.

Error 2: Confusing Overlapping Acts with Same Offence

Indian criminal law allows:
Same act → Multiple offences possible

Example:

• Hurt + Criminal force

• Theft + Breach of trust

Section 377 required:

• Unnatural intercourse

• Lack of consent

Marriage is irrelevant to these elements.

Error 3: Misuse of Implied Repeal Doctrine

Implied repeal applies only when:

• Two laws are irreconcilably inconsistent

• Clear legislative intent exists

But:

• Parliament expanded rape in 2013 but retained Section 377

• Supreme Court retained Section 377 for non-consensual acts in 2018

Hence, no implied repeal.

Error 4: Selective Application by Courts

Courts quashing Section 377 still allow:

• Cruelty (498A IPC / BNS equivalent)

• Hurt provisions

• Outraging modesty

If marriage nullifies sexual offences → Why not these?
Because marriage does NOT provide universal criminal immunity.

Constitutional Concerns

Marital rape exception faces challenges under:

Article 14 – Equality

Different protection for married vs unmarried women.

Article 21 – Right to Life and Dignity

Includes:

• Bodily autonomy

• Sexual autonomy

• Privacy

Case pending before the Supreme Court is challenging the constitutional validity.

International Perspective

Most countries have abolished marital rape immunity:

• United Kingdom

• Canada

• South Africa

• Most European nations

Global standard:
Marriage ≠ Permanent consent.

Impact of BNS 2023

Even though Section 377 is repealed:

• Doesn’t validate past judicial reasoning

• Doesn’t justify expanding marital immunity

Future interpretation will depend on:

• Supreme Court rulings

• Possible legislative reform

Conclusion

The marital rape exception was created as a limited exclusion within rape law, not as a universal defence. Extending it to other sexual offences:

• Distorts legislative intent

• Weakens criminal law structure

• Raises serious constitutional concerns

Marriage cannot become a legal zone where consent loses meaning. Until Parliament or Supreme Court settles the issue, courts must avoid expanding marital immunity beyond its statutory limits.

Sharing is caring!