Outlawing Marital Rape: A recurrently validated crime

Till date, marital rape is not considered a crime in India. Through the article, the Author aims to explain why the judiciary needs to urgently intervene and declare marital rape as unconstitutional. Taking the marital status of the perpetrator and the victim as a defence, the consent of a woman to sexual intercourse has been repeatedly de-prioritised by various High Courts in recent times. Further, the Author analyses some cases to show how consent cannot be easily detected, but a look into the totality of the circumstances helps determine the same. Lastly, the Author provides suggestions for dealing with marital rape as an offence.

Unconstitutionality of RCR: An Opportunity to Democratize ‘Marriage’

The author examines the constitutionality of the Restitution of Conjugal Rights and the State’s intrusion into private familial spheres. Beyond gender discrimination, RCR’s conception of marriage perpetuates inequality. It advocates for a reevaluation of this interpretation, not to negate expectations of intimacy within marriage but to challenge the legal enforcement of sexual relations as a conjugal right. The ongoing plea against the constitutionality of RCR offers an opportunity for the judiciary to redefine conjugal rights and reshape the institution of marriage.

The Places of Worship Act, 1991: An Enquiry into Constitutionality

The Places of Worship Act was intended to cease communal conflicts over history but it has failed to prevent conflicts such as the Gyanvapi Row. A part of this failure is attributable to the legislature’s omission to succinctly identify the existence of complex religious structures and conflicting historical experiences. This article examines the constitutionality of the Act’s provisions against the backdrop of history and provides an analysis of the ambiguity in the Act that needs rectification to ensure the true realization of justice.

On the Qualms of Secularism and Equality

In this article, the authors examine and critique the judgment of Hemant Gupta J. and his reasoning in the case of Aishat Shifa v. State of Karnataka. The piece also suggests that religious freedom and equality needs to be accompanied by a focus on reasonable accommodation.

Up ↑