Opposition MP urges govt to respond to concerns over marital rape issue after unsatisfactory reply by minister

The government in Rajya Sabha appeared wishy-washy on the subject of marital rape during the question hour in Parliament on Wednesday, with Minister of Women and Child Development Smriti Irani failing to clarify the government’s stand while responding to CPI MP Binoy Viswam’s question on the matter.

Viswam pointed out the difference in the definition of marital rape in Section 3 of the Domestic Violence Act and Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code. He wanted to know if the government had taken cognizance of the difference in the laws.

Section 3 of the Domestic Violence Act states that, “Any act, omission or commission shall constitute domestic violence in case it harms or injures or endangers the health, safety, life, limb or well-being, whether mental or physical, of the aggrieved person or tends to do so and includes causing physical abuse, sexual abuse, verbal and emotional abuse and economic abuse.

Section 375 of IPC, which defines rape, has an exception to the rule which states that sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife is not rape, if the wife is not under fifteen years of age.

Obfuscating the question by Viswam, Irani said, “To condemn every marriage in this country as a violent marriage and to condemn every man in this country as a rapist is not advisable.”

“The response by the Minister is an attempt to mislead the House and people of India on this serious issue as at no point has such a statement been made nor insinuated by the MP. Such statements not only seek to trivialize the issue of marital rape and domestic violence but are deeply insulting to the numerous women who have been subjected to this crime,” stated Viswam in Parliament.

While the issue of marital rape was being discussed during the Question Hour, BJP MP Sushil Kumar Modi asserted that the criminalisation of marital rape would end the institution of marriage in the country. The BJP lawmaker wanted to know the government’s stand on marital rape and urged the government to not criminalise it.

In a written response to Viswam, Irani had stated that the matter of marital rape is sub-judice before the High Court of Delhi. Further, the department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs, in its 146th report, had recommended that there is a need for a
comprehensive review of the criminal justice system of the country.

“Earlier, the Parliamentary Standing Committee in its 111th and 128th reports had also stressed upon the need to reform and rationalize the criminal law of the country by introducing a comprehensive legislation in Parliament rather than bringing about piece-meal amendments in respective Acts. Accordingly, the Government of India has initiated the process for comprehensive amendments to criminal laws in consultation with all stakeholders,” stated the minister in the written response.

The response by the Minister is further indicative of the government's failure to even acknowledge the existence of such issues and engage in constructive discussion on the same. In order to highlight the magnitude of the problem, Binoy Viswam urged the Minister to collate data from states on the issue and present it before the Parliament.

While discussing the issue in Parliament, DMK MP MM Abdul asked Irani if there would be any awareness programmes in schools and colleges on marital rape organised by the Union government. However, Irani side-stepped the question and informed the MP that such awareness programmed could be organised by MPs under DISHA guidelines.