Decriminalization of Section 497 of IPC

Adultery means sexual relationship of a married person

other than with spouse. In modern times, most of the
countries opted out to decriminalize adultery but from
ancient times, adultery was a sinful act almost in every
religion. In India, the offence of adultery was punishable
under Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and
entailed a maximum punishment of five years, or with fine
or both. Sec. 497 states, Whoever has sexual intercourse
with a person who is and whom he knows or has reason to
believe to be the wife of another man, without the consent
or connivance of that man, such sexual intercourse not
amounting to the offence of rape, is guilty of the offence of
adultery, and shall be punished with imprisonment of
either description for a term which may extend to five
years, or with fine, or with both. In such case the wife shall
not be punishable as an abettor.

Neither all the men are wrong, nor all the women are
right. Women cannot be abettors, is not true in all the
cases. Modification in the law was very essential, to serve
the purpose of Right to Equality. But decriminalizing
section 497 of IPC is having more loopholes than the
earlier law. Its anti-woman and anti-human. If we allow
men to do anything of their choice, there wont be any
difference between men and animal, in other words, its an
adoption of animal law. Institution of marriage is
meaningless. Foundation of the marriage is loyalty and
section 497 was preservative of the marriage. In absence
of the above law marriage will suffer a lot. The only
difference between ox and bull is of a one mitre tiny rope.
Its only the rope which makes an ox silent in nature and
potential for society and in absence of which a bull
becomes violent and vagrant. Section 497 was playing the
role of invisible rope for both men and women.

Section 497 was neither fit for man nor for woman. For
men it had an infringement of Rights but in the case of
women it was even worst. How could consent and
connivance of a man matters to have sexual intercourse
with the wife. Its demoralizing women and her dignity. It
clearly dealt with the perception of husband as a master of
women and house and wife as a speechless animal.
Someone who has the consent and connivance of her
husband, before having sex with her, would not amount the
charge of adultery. Modification in this law was a much-
needed step to make it more valid and effective. PIL
seeking modification in 157 years old law of adultery was
a perfect move to modify such a discriminatory law. For
the same amount of an offence if man is punishable,
woman should also get punished in the similar way.
Otherwise, Right to Equality which is guaranteed by
constitution, carries no importance. There should not be
any discrimination in the amount of the charges based on
gender. But scrapping the law is the worst and shocking
judgement. A five judges bench has shaken the beliefs of
those who believes in of marriage and loyalty. Sanctity of
marriage has been devastated. Section 497 has been
referred to old and outdated law. Laws can be outdated
but morality and loyalty can never become outdated and
decriminalizing adultery is approval of immorality and
treachery.

As quoted by former CJI Dipak Mishra-

If any aggrieved spouse committed suicide because of a
life partners adulterous relation and evidence is produced,
it could be treated as abetment to suicide;
When one partner is involved in such a heinous act of
adultery, the other partner dies every moment. But in the
eyes of law such death and mental distortion is carrying
lesser value rather than the personal choice of one spouse
to have sexual relationship with the person of his choice.
Law should be strict enough to mitigate the offences and it
should be life saver. One person who is going through all
the mental trauma because of an illicit affair of the spouse,
cant get justice while alive but the same can be gained
after death. What is the use of such a law which cannot
protect the life of a person.

Whether ancient or modern, throughout all the era the

adultery was continued but it had always been
disapproved, condemned and criticized by the civilized
part of the society and had never been legalised. It was a
sinful act, and person committing it, was liable to a lot of
social disgrace. Till now adultery was covered under grey
shed but Supreme Courts verdict has turned that grey shed
into white. Such law will lead us towards uncivilization. It
took hundreds of years for women to become empowered
and independent. Various existed laws played an
important role in women empowerment. They are living
their life with dignity and independently. They are for
away from below excerpts of Manu smriti-

Her father protects her in childhood, her husband protects

her in youth, and her sons protect her in old age; a woman
is never fit for independence.

In India, adultery was a ground for divorce under Section

13(1) of Hindu Marriage Act 1956. As Former CJI
stated Adultery can be ground for civil wrong, a ground
for divorce but not criminal offence. Without having any
idea that how many more cases of divorce are going to be
increased. CJI also stated Adultery might not be cause
unhappy marriage, it could be result of an unhappy
marriage.How could he assume that its only an outcome of
unhappy marriage, and not the outcome of having an
instinct for extra fun and adventure in life. As per the
recent survey done on the 500 people, 40% found to be
involved in extramarital affairs, 28% were men and 12%
women. While 40% said they were in an extramarital
relationship because they were craving for a change, 35%
said it was because of sexual incompatibility with spouse
and 15% said it was because of stress. And that stress was
not due to theUnhappiness in marriage and with their
partners. Some were pressured to get married to someone
they didnt love and that resulted in them seeking love
elsewhere. Some said they did it to pass time when they
were alone or away from their spouse, Not in a single
case, one partner was responsible for the extra marital
affair or adultery of the other partner. Suddenly, after
having marriage and children people realise that they are
not able to Satisfy their lust and they start seeking love and
lust outside of their marriages. And family suffers,
sometimes result into divorce and in few cases, it leads to
suicide of the other partner, mostly women. And now when
choice has been given by the court, the above ratio will
increase drastically. On one hand we are
banning Draconian Practice of Instant Triple Talaq to
curb down the divorce on the other hand we are creating
trench to bury validity of marriage by decriminalizing
adultery. If Triple Talaq is a draconian practice and
deserve to be banned, adultery is no less than that.

In India majority of women are still dependent whether

socially or financially, criminalization of adultery was the
most powerful source to stop the practice of adultery by
their husbands, scrapping 497 by Apex Court has stopped
women to raise their voice against the malpractice of
adultery. A socially, financially disabled and illiterate
women cannot opt for divorce too, hence she has no choice
left with her. This stress will lead them towards a lot of
physical and mental ailments. Right to Health is
meaningless to them. Apart from divorce and suicide for
women, its impact on children is more fatal. They will get
distorted from their own houses and families. Rather than
the existence of parents, there will be parent only.

They will be separated from their siblings too; their future

is in absolute dark. Decriminalisation of Sec. 497 ended
the fear of law to an adulterous person from doing the act.
This fearlessness will be turned them into bull-headed and
their foot-print will affect not only the family and society
but also the whole Nation. Where society suffers like this,
the doctrine of Directive Principles to form a Welfare State
could not be fulfilled.

In many countries, adultery is not a criminal offence and

many countries have legalised prostitution too. But we
cannot allow our judicial thinking to be constricted by
reference to the law as it prevails in other countries. We
have different social, cultural and economical condition
and we want law as per these parameters. Rather than
competing laws from western countries, we have to build
our own jurisprudence. This Anti-Women verdict should be
revised for the welfare of the Nation.

Written by: Anubha Singh