INDEPENDENT THOUGHT VS. UNION OF INDIA (2017) 

LEGAL SUBJECTS - Constitutional law, Child rights, Gender justice, Judicial Activism. 

·        CITATION OF THE CASE  - 

W. P (C) 383/2013

  FACTS –

 The petitioner, Independent Thought, is a non-profit organization focused on child rights. It filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution challenging Exception 2 to Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which exempted marital rape from being classified as an offense if it involved a girl aged between 15 and 18 years.   This provision allowed for forced sexual intercourse within marriage without consent, effectively depriving minor girls of their bodily autonomy and dignity.  The organization argued that this exception violated Articles 14 (Right to Equality), 15 (Prohibition of Discrimination), and 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) of the Constitution.  They contended that the law discriminated against married minor girls by treating them differently from unmarried girls, thereby perpetuating inequality and abuse.

 ISSUES  –

  Whether Exception 2 to Section 375 IPC, which permits sexual intercourse with a minor wife without consent, is unconstitutional. Whether the provision creates arbitrary discrimination between married and unmarried minors, violating their fundamental rights.

·       DECISION BY COURT -

        On October 12, 2017, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment, striking down Exception 2 to Section 375 IPC in relation to minors. The court held that  The exception was arbitrary, discriminatory, and violated Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution. It created an unjust classification between married and unmarried girls, undermining their dignity and bodily integrity. The court emphasized that every girl child is entitled to protection under human rights laws, including the right to live with dignity and freedom from violence. The ruling effectively raised the age of consent for sexual intercourse within marriage to 18 years, aligning it with other legal provisions concerning minors in India.

C    IMPORTANCE OF THE CASE -    

       The ruling established a crucial legal precedent regarding the recognition of marital rape as a crime against minors, reinforcing the need for legal protections for vulnerable populations.   It strengthened child rights in India by affirming that all children, regardless of marital status, are entitled to protection from sexual violence.  It is a landmark case that not only addressed immediate legal concerns regarding marital rape but also set a foundation for broader reforms in protecting women's and children's rights in India.

      Complied by Adv. Bincy Benny, Research and Training Admin, ATPA.

c