The parliamentary committee has put forth several grounds for recommending the re-criminalization of adultery. Their primary reasoning is to safeguard the sanctity of marriage while ensuring that the law is gender-neutral. This initiative aims to create a balanced approach to marital fidelity.
However, there are dissenting views among opposition MPs. They argue against elevating marriage to a sacramental level and express concerns regarding state intrusion into the private lives of individuals.
The committee has recommended reinstating adultery as a gender-neutral criminal offense. This recommendation underscores the importance of protecting the institution of marriage while adapting to contemporary societal norms.
The legislative history of adultery law in India traces back to initial stances taken by figures like Lord Macaulay, who opposed penalizing adultery and suggested pecuniary compensation instead. Under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), adultery was classified as an offense, penalizing only the male offender.
Notably, the Law Commission Reports from 1971 and the 156th report recommended the removal of the gender exemption for women, recognizing the need for legal reforms in line with societal changes. The Malimath Committee's 2003 report suggested retaining adultery as an offense but emphasized a gender-neutral approach.
The previous adultery law was repealed following a Supreme Court judgment in 2018. The court struck down the adultery provision in the IPC, viewing it as a matter of privacy rather than a criminal act. This judgment was catalyzed by a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Joseph Shine, which challenged the constitutional validity of the existing adultery law.
The Centre argued that diluting the adultery law would undermine the institution of marriage. However, the court reasoned that adultery should be considered a civil wrong rather than a crime, emphasizing respect for individual autonomy and privacy rights.
There is a question of whether the Supreme Court ruling can be overturned. Parliament possesses the authority to overrule judicial decisions by altering the legal framework that underpins such judgments. However, the Supreme Court's stance indicates that any legislative validation must address the defects pointed out in its ruling.
Q1. What is the main reason for the re-criminalization of adultery in India?
Answer: The main reason is to safeguard the sanctity of marriage on gender-neutral grounds, as highlighted by a parliamentary committee's recommendation.
Q2. What was the Supreme Court's stance on the adultery law in 2018?
Answer: The Supreme Court struck down the adultery law, deeming it a matter of privacy rather than a criminal offense, thus prioritizing individual autonomy.
Q3. Can Parliament overturn the Supreme Court judgment on adultery?
Answer: Yes, Parliament can potentially overturn the ruling by changing the legal basis of the judgment, provided it addresses the identified flaws.
Q4. What changes did the Malimath Committee recommend regarding adultery?
Answer: The Malimath Committee recommended retaining adultery as an offense but emphasized that it should be treated as gender-neutral.
Q5. Why did some MPs dissent against the re-criminalization of adultery?
Answer: Opposition MPs argued against raising marriage to a sacramental level and opposed state intrusion into personal lives, advocating for individual privacy.
Question 1: What was the primary reason for the parliamentary committee's recommendation on adultery?
A) To promote gender discrimination
B) To safeguard the sanctity of marriage
C) To eliminate privacy rights
D) To increase legal penalties
Correct Answer: B
Question 2: What did the Supreme Court declare about the adultery law in 2018?
A) It remains a criminal offense
B) It is a matter of privacy
C) It only affects women
D) It was upheld as constitutional
Correct Answer: B
Question 3: What was the stance of the Malimath Committee regarding adultery law?
A) Abolish it completely
B) Retain it but make it gender-neutral
C) Keep it as is
D) Strengthen penalties
Correct Answer: B
Question 4: Who filed the PIL challenging the adultery law's constitutionality?
A) Lord Macaulay
B) Joseph Shine
C) Malimath Committee
D) Parliamentary Committee
Correct Answer: B
Question 5: What is a potential outcome of the Parliament's power regarding Supreme Court rulings?
A) It can invalidate all laws
B) It can overrule judicial decisions
C) It cannot legislate on any matter
D) It must adhere to all court decisions
Correct Answer: B
Kutos : AI Assistant!
