The Supreme Court is hearing the challenge to Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code, a provision that criminalises adultery, for the third day..The case is being heard by a Constitution Bench presided by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, along with Justices Rohinton Nariman, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra..For a summary of yesterday’s hearing, read here..Live updates follow:.Submissions by Jayna Kothari.Jayna Kothari making submissions on aspect of privacy and the right of person to decide on his/her intimate associationRefers to US decisions explaining the scope of right to privacyNow arguing on whether the institution of marriage will be affected or not by quashing Section 497The basis for adultery law is that woman is considered a property of a man upon marriage and she cannot have sexual relations outside marriage while the man is allowed to, Jayna Kothari concludes her arguments..Submissions by Pinky Anand.Additional Solicitor General Pinky Anand commences her arguments on behalf of Union of IndiaSubmits judgments of foreign jurisdictions should not be taken into account and matter has to be decided based on social conditions prevalent in IndiaThe provision extracts fidelity from woman which it does not extract from man, DY Chandrachud J. remarks. Under inclusion in this case does not give recourse to woman whose husband enters into sexual relationship with a single woman, says Chandrachud J.What is the collective good in Section 497? asks CJI Dipak MisraIn the Indian context, it impacts not just the two individuals but their familes and societies and ultimately the State, submits ASG Pinky AnandHow can relation between two individuals be a crime and hence an offence against society, is it not a matrimonial issue, queries Justice Indu Malhotra.In India, marriage is a sacred institution. Therefore, any intrusion into that is something which should attract penal consequences, ASG Pinky Anand.On whether the offence should hold good even if husband gives consent to wife for sexual relationship with another man: “We cannot apply doctrine of severability to make an offence/ provision more severe than what the Legislature intended”, DY Chandrachud J.Pinky Anand submits that basis of provision is not treatment of women as chattel but it only accounted for (ill) treatment meted out to women.Various Law Commissions have looked at the proposition of gender neutraility wrt to Section 497A barrage of questions from the Bench to ASG Pinky Anand post lunchEven if you make Section 497 gender neutral, it only addresses the question of under inclusion; We still have to decide whether it should be a crime, DY Chandrachud J.Sustenance of a relationship is based on the parties, their willingness to adjust; State should not come into it, remarks CJI Dipak MisraHearing concludes; Supreme Court reserves judgment..Read the written submissions by Union of India.
The Supreme Court is hearing the challenge to Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code, a provision that criminalises adultery, for the third day..The case is being heard by a Constitution Bench presided by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, along with Justices Rohinton Nariman, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra..For a summary of yesterday’s hearing, read here..Live updates follow:.Submissions by Jayna Kothari.Jayna Kothari making submissions on aspect of privacy and the right of person to decide on his/her intimate associationRefers to US decisions explaining the scope of right to privacyNow arguing on whether the institution of marriage will be affected or not by quashing Section 497The basis for adultery law is that woman is considered a property of a man upon marriage and she cannot have sexual relations outside marriage while the man is allowed to, Jayna Kothari concludes her arguments..Submissions by Pinky Anand.Additional Solicitor General Pinky Anand commences her arguments on behalf of Union of IndiaSubmits judgments of foreign jurisdictions should not be taken into account and matter has to be decided based on social conditions prevalent in IndiaThe provision extracts fidelity from woman which it does not extract from man, DY Chandrachud J. remarks. Under inclusion in this case does not give recourse to woman whose husband enters into sexual relationship with a single woman, says Chandrachud J.What is the collective good in Section 497? asks CJI Dipak MisraIn the Indian context, it impacts not just the two individuals but their familes and societies and ultimately the State, submits ASG Pinky AnandHow can relation between two individuals be a crime and hence an offence against society, is it not a matrimonial issue, queries Justice Indu Malhotra.In India, marriage is a sacred institution. Therefore, any intrusion into that is something which should attract penal consequences, ASG Pinky Anand.On whether the offence should hold good even if husband gives consent to wife for sexual relationship with another man: “We cannot apply doctrine of severability to make an offence/ provision more severe than what the Legislature intended”, DY Chandrachud J.Pinky Anand submits that basis of provision is not treatment of women as chattel but it only accounted for (ill) treatment meted out to women.Various Law Commissions have looked at the proposition of gender neutraility wrt to Section 497A barrage of questions from the Bench to ASG Pinky Anand post lunchEven if you make Section 497 gender neutral, it only addresses the question of under inclusion; We still have to decide whether it should be a crime, DY Chandrachud J.Sustenance of a relationship is based on the parties, their willingness to adjust; State should not come into it, remarks CJI Dipak MisraHearing concludes; Supreme Court reserves judgment..Read the written submissions by Union of India.
