The Chhattisgarh High Court recently ruled that a husband cannot be held guilty of rape (Section 375 IPC) or unnatural offences (Section 377 IPC) for non-consensual sexual acts, including anal sex, with his wife if she is above 15 years of age.
Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas relied on Exception 2 to Section 375 IPC, which states that sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his wife are not considered rape if the wife is not under 15 years of age.
The Court observed that after the 2013 amendment to Section 375, any act of sexual penetration by a husband with his wife, even without consent, cannot be treated as rape. Similarly, such acts also cannot be considered offences under Section 377 IPC.
Case Background
The case involved Gorakhnth Sharma, who was convicted by the trial court for rape, unnatural offence, and causing the death of his wife after allegedly inserting his hand into her rectum. The wife later complained of severe pain, was hospitalized, and died due to peritonitis and rectal perforation.
Before her death, she made a dying declaration stating that her husband had committed unnatural sexual acts. Based on this and medical evidence, the trial court sentenced Sharma to 10 years in prison.
High Court’s Findings
On appeal, the accused argued that the conviction was based only on a doubtful dying declaration and that the victim had long suffered from piles, which caused anal bleeding and abdominal pain.
The High Court noted:
- Under Section 375, penetration into the vagina, urethra, or anus amounts to rape, but the exception excludes acts between husband and wife when the wife is above 15.
- Therefore, non-consensual or unnatural sex between husband and wife does not fall under rape or unnatural offences.
- The dying declaration lacked corroboration from other evidence, raising doubts about its reliability.
The Court also found that the trial court had not properly explained how Section 304 IPC (causing death by negligence) applied to the case.
Final Decision
The High Court held that the conviction under Sections 375, 377, and 304 IPC was unsustainable. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, and Sharma was acquitted of all charges.
Case Title: Gorakhnth Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh
Be a part our social media community:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/IndianMan.in?mibextid=ZbWKwL
Instagram:
https://www.instagram.com/indianman.in?igsh=MWZ2N3N0ZmpwM3l3cw==
