Why Section 497 Should Be Made Gender Neutral
The Indian Penal Code (IPC) Section 497 is often criticized for being gender-biased, with complaints ranging from discrimination against women to unfair treatment of men. This article explores the reasons why Section 497 should be reformed to achieve gender neutrality, focusing on its implications for both genders.
Understanding the Current Text of Section 497
Section 497 of the IPC states:
497. Adultery — 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.
Discrimination Against Married Women
The section creates multiple forms of discrimination:
Control Over Consent: The section establishes a man's right to control his wife's sexual autonomy, treating her as an extension of his marital property. This can be seen as an offshoot of Section 375 IPC, which protects marital rape. Protecting Marital Status: It inherently protects consensual sexual acts between unmarried women and men, while penalizing similar acts that involve a married woman. Imposing Men’s Consent: The requirement of the husband's consent or connivance creates a burden of proof that can be challenging for women to meet. Rape vs. Adultery: The lack of rape provisions means that consent is not a complete defense against adultery, making it an extremely discriminatory law for married women.Discrimination Against Accused Men
The section also includes forms of discrimination against men accused of adultery:
No Abetment Punishment: The law doesn’t punish the wife as an abettor, even though she may be complicit. Restrictive Crimes: The implication that adultery is not rape means that men accused of adultery cannot use consent as a complete defense. Lower Legal Recourse: The law only permits husbands to bring charges against adultery, not wives.Case Law and Statistics Supporting Reforms
To highlight the need for reform, consider the following points:
Discrimination Against Women: Atmaja Bandyopadhyay, in her response to why IPC's section 497 doesn't grant any rights to a wife of a man who is committing adultery, highlights Article 153 of the Constitution, which allows for special provisions for women and children. High Court and Supreme Court Statistics: With over 90,629 cases less than a year old in High Courts and Supreme Courts, and over 59,021 cases pending in the Supreme Court, the existing laws show a significant backlog, indicating the need for a more equitable framework. Gender Neutrality: The current section disproportionately affects women, making it necessary to decriminalize adultery with certain reservations or make it gender-neutral to ensure fairness.Conclusion
Reforming Section 497 to achieve gender neutrality is crucial. This would involve either making adultery a crime for both genders equally or decriminalizing it with specified exceptions. Only then can we truly uphold the principles of knowledge and goodwill, ensuring that our laws protect and respect the rights of all individuals equally.
Atma Deepo Bhava: Let knowledge and goodwill reign supreme!