He stated that under the law no one can compel a woman to have sex, and that this is the principle behind Section 375 except for the exception.
“A woman has the individual choice which has been legally recognised… The question one needs to ask themselves is, are the wives expected to succumb to the will of the husbands every time. The law says no one can compel a woman to make love. This is the principle behind 375, except the exception… The law says, Sorry! Young Woman or Lady but this is not rape. It says I will assist you but not allow you to call it what it is,” he said.
Addressing the role of the legislature in keeping the provision on the statute books for several decades despite Independence he argued,
“The exception condescends. What is particularly insulting is that this condescension comes from the legislature. They had the option to say that this law has been since pre-independence therefore will not apply post-independence, but they did not say this… This is where Courts have to take action.”
He further added that there is no doubt that that husband does have rights but “the question is does he have the right to escape the rigors of law and say that it is his birth right or something that he is entitled to do?”
Source: Barandbench
