Sometimes, I am surprised by our position as women in society. Is it necessary to always have a man in our lives to protect us? And even if we do, is there any guarantee that he—whether a father, brother, friend, or husband—will always safeguard us with the utmost care? What if the protector turns into a monster? In such cases, should society remain silent, or should we hold the perpetrator accountable? No one has the right to harm or kill a woman—whether she is a daughter, sister, or wife.
A recent judgment by the Chhattisgarh High Court has reignited a critical debate: Does marriage grant a man the license to rape? However, this question has now evolved. The more pressing issue is—does marriage give a husband the right to engage in unnatural sex, even if it results in his wife’s death?
In recent years, crimes against women have escalated significantly. The number of reported cases has surged, yet justice often remains elusive. Recently, in an appeal case, the Chhattisgarh High Court ruled that “unnatural sex by a husband in marriage is not an offense.” The case involved a 40-year-old man convicted by a Sessions Court for the death of his wife in 2017. The victim suffered severe injuries and eventually died due to forced unnatural sex.
According to reports, on December 11, 2017, the husband engaged in non-consensual unnatural sex with his wife, causing her immense pain, and then left for work. Struggling with excruciating pain and discomfort, the wife sought help from her husband sister and another relative, who took her to the hospital. She succumbed to her injuries a few hours later. In her dying declaration to the magistrate and police, she stated that her husband had forced himself on her, leading to her deteriorating condition.
In India’s legal system, a dying declaration holds significant evidentiary value and is sufficient for conviction unless contradicted by other evidence. The post-mortem report confirmed that the cause of death was peritonitis and rectal perforation—indicating severe injuries to the abdomen and rectum. Based on this evidence, the trial court convicted the husband of unnatural sex and culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
However, the High Court overturned the conviction, ruling that if a wife is over 15 years old, “any sexual intercourse” by the husband cannot be considered rape under any circumstances. Consequently, the absence of the wife’s consent for unnatural acts was deemed legally irrelevant.
This raises a serious concern: Even when a 30-year-old woman loses her life due to forced unnatural sex, does the law still fail to recognize her suffering? Does our judiciary and legislature truly value women’s lives? This judgment is deeply distressing for every woman. It is truly shameful to witness a man who caused his wife’s death in the pursuit of his unnatural desires now walking free.
How many more cases do we need before we acknowledge the gravity of this issue? How many women must lose their lives due to such heinous acts? Today, I am not writing this article as a lawyer or an academician—I am writing as a woman first. Before my roles in family and society, I am a woman. Our devotion to goddesses becomes meaningless when we are tortured by those meant to protect us.
Marital rape has long been a contentious issue in India. Several petitions are still pending before the Supreme Court, seeking its criminalization. While marriage is considered a sacred institution, and sex is an integral part of it, it should be based on mutual comfort and respect. It should not be an act where one partner enjoys while the other suffers mentally and physically. Every sexual act between a husband and wife should be founded on mutual understanding—only then can a marriage truly succeed.
Spousal sexual violence within marriage causes the same trauma as other forms of rape. In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India, in Independent Thought v. Union of India, amended Section 375 of the IPC to align with the Constitution and child protection laws. The new interpretation states: “Sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his wife, if she is not below eighteen years of age, is not rape.” However, despite this change, the Central Government informed the Supreme Court that it does not recognize marital rape as an offense.
Despite years of advocacy, our government has failed to provide legal protection against marital rape. It has failed to acknowledge the trauma and pain suffered by married women. Numerous national and international studies highlight the severe impact of marital rape, with some victims requiring medical intervention. The recent Chhattisgarh case is just one of many examples.
How many more women must endure violence behind closed doors? How many must sacrifice their lives to satisfy their husbands? In many Indian families, newlywed brides are still taught by their in-laws or elder sisters that they must “surrender” to their husbands—physically and emotionally—because it is their duty. Many women, even if they dislike it or feel pain, continue to endure it due to societal and familial pressure. Shockingly, the law interprets this forced submission as consent.
However, consent and free consent are not the same, and it is time our lawmakers understood this distinction. What they consider “consent” may not be free consent.
Isn’t it high time we initiate another movement—one beyond #MeToo? This time, it should be #MeTooMaritalRape.
As a signatory to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), India has failed its married women by refusing to recognize marital rape as a crime. We strongly urge the Indian government to implement CEDAW in its true spirit. One of the key reasons for its ineffective implementation is that CEDAW, as a soft law, is not legally enforceable in India. The rising cases of violence against women highlight the urgent need for its robust enforcement. To address this, a new Optional Protocol to CEDAW is essential—one that would serve as a binding treaty.
The new Optional Protocol to CEDAW will reinforce state accountability in preventing and responding to all forms of violence against women and girls. It will compel states to strengthen their protection and prevention measures, ensuring greater safety for women and girls. Additionally, it will support states in achieving Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) No. 5 on gender equality by working towards the complete elimination of violence against women and girls.
I believe this case from Chhattisgarh, India will spark a sense of sisterhood among women and ignite a feminist movement in India—one that brings about meaningful change, ensuring that no woman loses her life to such brutality again.
Dr. Pyali Chatterjee, HOD Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, ICFAI University, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India
