What is Adultery law or IPC Section 497 in India
New Delhi : The Supreme Court of India on September 27, decided to scrap Section 497, which deals with adultery, of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The five-judge Constitution bench, led by Chief Justice Dipak Misra and comprising Justices R F Nariman, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra, had reserved its verdict regarding the case in August.
The bench called the law an age-old one and says that it violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution. The justice said, “Adultery can be ground for civil issues including dissolution of marriage but it cannot be a criminal offence.”
What is Adultery law
Section 497 of Indian Penal Code deals with Adultery which states, a man can be punished for having a sexual relationship with a married woman without the consent of her husband. In India, adultery is a crime and the punishment for the same can be imprisonment for five years, or fine, or both.
Take a look at what Justice Chandrachud and Justice Khanwilkar stated in the judgment on adultery law
"Section 497 criminalizes the conduct of the man who has sexual intercourse with the wife of another without his consent. It exempts women from criminal liability. Underlying this exemption is the notion that women, being denuded of sexual agency, should be afforded the ‘protection’ of the law. In criminalizing the accused who engages in the sexual relationship, the law perpetuates a gender stereotype that men, possessing sexual agency are the seducers, and that women, as passive beings devoid of sexual agency, are the seduced," they said.
Further, they added “It is deeply offensive to equality and destructive of the dignity of the woman. On this stereotype, Section 497 criminalizes only the accused man."
Meanwhile, Justice RF Nariman said ""The real heart of this archaic law discloses itself when consent or connivance of the married woman‘s husband is obtained – the married or unmarried man who has sexual intercourse with such a woman, does not then commit the offence of adultery. This can only be on the paternalistic notion of a woman being likened to chattel, for if one is to use the chattel or is licensed to use the chattel by the "licensor", namely, the husband, no offence is committed,"
Further he stated, "What is clear, therefore, is that this archaic law has long outlived its purpose and does not square with today‘s constitutional morality, in that the very object with which it was made has since become manifestly arbitrary, having lost its rationale long ago and having become in today‘s day and age, utterly irrational. On this basis alone, the law deserves to be struck down."
However, women activists oppose SC's verdict and request clarity on polygamy. Congress leader Renuka Chowdhury drew similarities between verdict on adultery and the verdict on triple talaq saying, “They have done that but now the men will just abandon us or not give us talaq. They will have polygamy or nikah hallala which creates hell for us as women. I am glad it’s not a crime anymore but I do not see how it helps. The court should… give us clarity.”
During the judgement, Justice Indu Malhotra delved into the history of Section 497 of the IPC and explained in the ruling "the law was framed in the historical context that the infidelity of the wife should not be punished because of the plight of women in this country during the 1860s."
"The time when wives were invisible to the law, and lived in the shadows of their husbands, has long since gone by. A legislation that perpetuates such stereo-types in relationships, and institutionalises discrimination is a clear violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution,"
