Adultery under S. 497 IPC whether violative of right to equality?

Tilak Marg Forum for Legal Questions Forums Criminal Law Adultery under S. 497 IPC whether violative of right to equality?

Tagged: ,

Viewing 1 reply thread
  • Author
    Posts
    • #1550
      Anonymous
      Guest

      Section 497 IPC defines the offence of adultery. Here the man is liable for the act of adultery, but the woman who takes part in the same act is not liable since Section 497 itself clearly says that “In such case the wife shall not be punishable as an abettor.”

      Is it not violation of articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution which guarantee right to equality and prohibit discrimination on grounds of sex alone?

    • #1551

      It is too late in the day to ask this question. Exactly the same question was raised before the Supreme Court in the case of Yusuf Abdul Aziz v. State of Bombay, AIR 1954 SC 321 : 1954 SCR 930, which was decided by a 5-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court.

      In that case, the appellant was being prosecuted for adultery under Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code. He challenged it on the ground whether Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code contravenes Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution.

      The Supreme Court held that the portion of Article 15 on which the appellant relied is this:

      “The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of … sex.”

      But, the Court noted that what he overlooked is that this was subject to clause (3) which runs—

      “Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women….”

      The Supreme Court held that the provision complained of is a special provision and it is made for women, therefore it is saved by clause (3) of Article 15. It was argued on behalf of the appellant that clause (3) of Article 15 should be confined to provisions which are beneficial to women and cannot be used to give them a licence to commit and abet crimes. However, the Supreme Court refused to read any such restriction into the clause; and it further held that it did not agree that a provision which prohibits punishment is tantamount to a licence to commit the offence of which punishment has been prohibited.

      Supreme Court also observed that Article 14 is general and must be read with the other provisions which set out the ambit of fundamental rights. Sex is a sound classification and although there can be no discrimination in general on that ground, the Constitution itself provides for special provisions in the case of women and children. It was held that the two articles read together validate the impugned clause in Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code.

      In view of this, it should be clear that Section 497 of IPC has been held to be NOT in violation of the right to equality.

           


      Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

Viewing 1 reply thread
  • The forum ‘Criminal Law’ is closed to new Questions and replies.

You may also like to read these topics:

Can the State file a writ petition before the High Court?
The Indian Constitution is null & void ab initio
Should age limit eligibility be removed for education on basis of right to education?
Filing a direct writ at supreme court under article 32