Kerala HC Passes Landmark Judgements, Upholds Marital Rape As Just Cause For Divorce

The Kerala High Court, in two separate cases passed landmark judgements on laws related to sexual assault.

Marital rape can be the ground for divorce

In the first case, it ruled that committing sexual actions against the will of a wife is known as "marital rape," and it is a valid reason for divorce.

The appeal of the husband against a Family Court ruling, which approved the wife's request for divorce on the grounds of cruelty, was dismissed by a bench consisting of Justice A Muhammed Mustaque and Justice Kauser Edappagath stating, "In this case, the insatiable urge for wealth and sex of the husband had forced the wife to take a decision for divorce. His licentious and profligate conduct cannot be considered as part of normal conjugal life. Therefore, we have no difficulty in holding that insatiable urge for wealth and sex of a spouse would also amount to cruelty."

According to the Bench, the right to physical and mental integrity includes bodily integrity, and any disrespect or violation of bodily integrity is a breach of individual autonomy. The Bench also recognised that “merely for the reason that the law does not recognise marital rape under Penal Law, it does not inhibit the court from recognising the same as a form of cruelty to grant a divorce. We, therefore, are of the view that marital rape is a good ground to claim divorce”.

Expanding the definition of rape

In the second case, on August 4th, a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court concluded that the definition of rape in Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code includes sexual assaults, including activities conducted between the victim's thighs.

The Bench led by Justice K Vinod Chandran observed in a case involving the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) that “Section 375 takes in sexual assaults beyond penile penetration into vagina, urethra, anus, and mouth, the known orifices in the human body to which such penetration was imaginably possible.”

The court stated, “Any part of such woman's body, as indicated in Section 375(c) of the IPC, includes within its ambit a penile sexual act conducted between the thighs held together; which do not qualify to be considered an orifice.”