{"id":202343,"date":"2018-09-27T20:55:07","date_gmt":"2018-09-27T15:25:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=202343"},"modified":"2019-05-23T16:47:37","modified_gmt":"2019-05-23T11:17:37","slug":"section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/","title":{"rendered":"Section 497 IPC and Section 198(2) CrPC unconstitutional; adultery no more an offence : SC"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><em>The civility of a civilization earns warmth and respect when it respects more the individuality of a woman. The said concept gets a further accent when a woman is treated with the real spirit of equality with a man. Any system treating a woman with indignity, inequity and inequality or discrimination invites a wrath of the Constitution.<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><em>\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 &#8211; Dipak Misra, CJI and A.M. Khanwilkar ,J.<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Supreme Court: <\/strong>The 5-Judge Constitution Bench has held section 497 IPC and Section 198 (2) CrPC to be unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 15 (1) and 21 of the Constitution. CJ Dipak Misra delivered the leading judgment for himself and A.M. Khanwilkar, J. While R.F. Nariman, Dr D.Y. Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra, JJ., each delivered their separate concurring opinions.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Before the Supreme court, in the writ petition, was the constitutional validity of Section 497 IPC which criminalizes adultery and Section 198 (2) CrPC which provides for offences against marriages. Petitioner submitted that the provision by its very nature is arbitrary and invited the frown of Article 14 of the constitution.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>CJ Dipak Misra <\/strong>(for himself and A.M. Khanwilkar) stated that on a reading of the provision, it is demonstrable that women are subordinated to men in as much as it lays down that when there is connivance or the consent of the man (husband), there is no offense. This treats the woman as a chattel. It treats her as the property of man and totally subservient to the will of the master. It is the reflection of the social dominance that was prevalent when the penal provision was drafted. It was also noted that the section doesn&#8217;t bring within its purview an extramarital relationship with the unmarried woman or a widow. It treats husband of the women to be a person aggrieved for the offense punishable under Section 497. It does not treat the wife of the adulterer as an aggrieved person. In regard to <strong>dignity to women and gender equality, <\/strong>it was observed that Section 497 curtails equality to and dignity of women by creating invidious distinctions based on gender stereotypes which creates a dent in the individuality of women. Besides, the emphasis on the element of connivance or consent of the husband tantamount to subordination of women. Therefore we have no hesitation in holding that the same offends <em>Article 21 of the constitution.<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In the words of the Court, &#8220;treating adultery an offense, we are disposed to think, would tantamount o the State entering into real private realm. Under the existing provision, the husband is treated as an aggrieved person and the wife is ignored as a victim. Presently the provision is reflective of a tripartite labyrinth. A situation maybe conceived of where equality of status and the right to file a case maybe conferred on the wife. In either situation, the whole scenario is extremely private.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>R.F. Nariman, J.\u00a0<\/strong>In his concurring opinion referred to various religious testaments and texts as also law and judgments of various foreign jurisdictions. He observed that the ostensible object of Section 497, being to protect and preserve the sanctity of marriage, is not, in fact, the object of Section 497 IPC. The sanctity of marriage can be utterly destroyed by a married man having sexual intercourse with an unmarried woman or a widow. Also, if the husband consents or connives at such sexual intercourse, the offence is not committed, thereby showing that it is not sanctity of marriage which is sought to be protected and preserved, but a proprietary right of a husband. Secondly, no deterrent effect has been shown to exist, or ever to have existed, which may be a legitimate consideration for a State enacting criminal law. Also, manifest arbitrariness is writ large even in cases where the offender happens to be a married woman whose marriage has broken down, as a result of which she no longer cohabits with her husband, and may, in fact, have obtained a decree for judicial separation against her husband, preparatory to a divorce being granted. If, during this period, she has sex with another man, the other man is immediately guilty of the offence.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Dr D.Y. Chandrachud, J.\u00a0<\/strong>also referred to foreign judgments and distinguished authors. Section 497 IPC is destructive of and deprives a woman of her agency, autonomy and dignity. If the ostensible object of the law is to protect the &#8216;institution of marriage&#8217;, it provides no justification for not recognising the agency of a woman whose spouse is engaged in a sexual relationship outside of marriage. She can neither complain nor is the fact that she is in a marital relationship with a man of any significance to the ingredients of the offence. The law also deprives the married woman who has engaged in a sexual act with another man, of her agency. She is treated as the property of her husband. That is why no offence of adultery would be made out if her husband were to consent to her sexual relationship outside marriage. Worse still, if the spouse of the woman were to connive with the person with whom she has engaged in sexual intercourse, the law would blink. Section 497 is thus founded on the notion that a woman by entering upon marriage loses, so to speak, her voice, autonomy and agency. manifest arbitrariness is writ large on the provision.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Indu Malhotra, J.,\u00a0<\/strong>the only woman on the Bench traced the origin of the word\u00a0<em>adultery\u00a0<\/em>from the French language; and discussed the <em>doctrine of coverture<\/em>, historical background of Section 497 and contemporary international jurisprudence. She observed that the Section is replete with anomalies and incongruities which renders it liable to be struck down as arbitrary and discriminatory.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Resultantly, Section 497 IPC and Section 198(2) CrPC were struck down. And the decisions in <em>Sowmithri Vishnu v. Union of India, <\/em><a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/Q5XSi3x6\">1985 Supp SCC 137 <\/a>and\u00a0<em>V. Revathi v. Union of India, <\/em><a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/2ubXjZjA\">(1988) 2 SCC 72 <\/a>were overruled. Justice Malhotra, in her opinion, delivered, also held\u00a0<em>W. Kalyani v. State, <\/em><a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/1m7rnZ3W\">(2012) 1 SCC 358 <\/a>as overruled. The petition was accordingly disposed of. [Joseph Shine v. Union of India,<a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/3y98W4kY\"><b>(2019) 3 SCC 39<\/b><\/a>, decided on 27-09-2018]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The civility of a civilization earns warmth and respect when it respects more the individuality of a woman. The said concept gets <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":154914,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[2638,7292,26084,2829],"class_list":["post-202343","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-adultery","tag-article-14","tag-section-497-ipc","tag-unconstitutional"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Section 497 IPC and Section 198(2) CrPC unconstitutional; adultery no more an offence : SC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Section 497 IPC and Section 198(2) CrPC unconstitutional; adultery no more an offence : SC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The civility of a civilization earns warmth and respect when it respects more the individuality of a woman. The said concept gets\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-09-27T15:25:07+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-05-23T11:17:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/\",\"name\":\"Section 497 IPC and Section 198(2) CrPC unconstitutional; adultery no more an offence : SC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-09-27T15:25:07+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-05-23T11:17:37+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Section 497 IPC and Section 198(2) CrPC unconstitutional; adultery no more an offence : SC\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Section 497 IPC and Section 198(2) CrPC unconstitutional; adultery no more an offence : SC | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Section 497 IPC and Section 198(2) CrPC unconstitutional; adultery no more an offence : SC","og_description":"The civility of a civilization earns warmth and respect when it respects more the individuality of a woman. The said concept gets","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-09-27T15:25:07+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-05-23T11:17:37+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/","name":"Section 497 IPC and Section 198(2) CrPC unconstitutional; adultery no more an offence : SC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","datePublished":"2018-09-27T15:25:07+00:00","dateModified":"2019-05-23T11:17:37+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/section-497-ipc-and-section-198-crpc-unconstitutional-adultery-no-more-an-offence-sc\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Section 497 IPC and Section 198(2) CrPC unconstitutional; adultery no more an offence : SC"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":202280,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/breaking-section-497-ipc-deprives-women-of-dignity-adultery-decriminalised-and-held-unconstitutional-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":202343,"position":0},"title":"Breaking| Section 497 IPC &#8216;deprives women of dignity&#8217; &#8211; Adultery decriminalised and held unconstitutional: SC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 27, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: A five-Judge Constitution Bench consisting of CJ Dipak Misra, R.F Nariman, A.M Khanwilkar, Dr D.Y Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra, JJ., pronounced the verdict for reconsideration of the judgments on the constitutional validity of Section 497 IPC that brings adultery into the box of criminalisation. Legal subordination of one\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Hot Off The Press&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Hot Off The Press","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/hot_off_the_press\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":199386,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/01\/adultery-section-497-ipc-dent-on-the-individual-identity\/","url_meta":{"origin":202343,"position":1},"title":"Adultery: Section 497 IPC | Dent on the individual identity?","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 1, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The 5-Judge Constitution Bench comprising of CJ Dipak Misra and Rohinton Fali Nariman, AM Khanwilkar, Dr DY Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra, JJ., commenced with the proceedings on reconsideration of the judgments on the Constitutional validity of Section 497 IPC that brings adultery into the box of criminalization. The\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":199527,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/02\/day-2-adultery-section-497-ipc-de-criminalising-adultery-is-not-licensing-adultery-dy-chandrachud-j\/","url_meta":{"origin":202343,"position":2},"title":"[Day-2] Adultery: Section 497 IPC | De-criminalising adultery is not licensing adultery: Dr DY Chandrachud J.","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 2, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The 5-Judge Constitution bench comprising of CJ Dipak Misra and RF Nariman, AM Khanwilkar, Dr DY Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra, JJ., commenced with the day 2 on the Constitutional validity of Section 497 IPC hearing in regard to \u201cAdultery\u201d. Learned Counsel Kaleeswaram began with the arguments and placed\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":180114,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/01\/05\/adultery-constitution-bench-decide-constitutional-validity-section-497-ipc\/","url_meta":{"origin":202343,"position":3},"title":"Adultery: Constitution Bench to decide the constitutional validity of Section 497 IPC","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"January 5, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Noticing that there is a need to reconsider the earlier judgments on the Constitutional validity of Section 497 IPC, regard being had to the social progression, perceptual shift, gender equality and gender sensitivity, the 3-judge bench of Dipak Misra, CJ and AM Khanwilkar and Dr. DY Chandrachud, JJ\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":213386,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/08\/pat-hc-adultery-joseph-shine-v-union-of-india-given-retrospective-effect-proceedings-under-s-497-ipc-set-aside\/","url_meta":{"origin":202343,"position":4},"title":"Pat HC | Adultery: Joseph Shine v. Union of India given retrospective effect; proceedings under S. 497 IPC set aside","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"April 8, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Patna High Court: The Bench of Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J. quashed criminal proceeding filed in the year 2013 under Section 497 of the Penal Code, 1860 against a person accused of adultery, in view of Supreme Court\u2019s decision in Joseph Shine v. Union of India, (2019) 3 SCC 39. Petitioner herein\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":174404,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/08\/adultery-sc-asks-centre-women-not-punished-section-497-ipc\/","url_meta":{"origin":202343,"position":5},"title":"Adultery: SC asks Centre why women should not be punished under Section 497 IPC","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"December 8, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Agreeing to hear the petition that sought for examining Section 497 of Penal Code, the 3-judge bench of Dipak Misra, CJ and AM Khanwilkar and Dr. DY Chandrachud, JJ issued notice to Central Government asking\u00a0why a married woman, who is equally liable for the offence of adultery with\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/202343","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=202343"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/202343\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/154914"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=202343"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=202343"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=202343"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}