CHANDIGARH - The Punjab and Haryana High Court will adjudicate whether a legally wedded wife can lodge an FIR against her husband on the allegations of rape. The petitioner-husband has claimed that the offence of rape under Section 376 of the IPC was not made out against him as the respondent-complainant was his legally wedded wife and admittedly “both made physical relations after marriage”.

Taking up the petition filed by the husband, mother-in-law and sister-in-law through counsel Arnav Sood, Justice Amol Rattan Singh has not only put the state of Punjab and the complainant on notice, but also directed the trial court to adjourn the matter for the time being. “Till the next date of hearing only and specifically, the trial court is directed to adjourn the matter to a date beyond that given by this court…,” Justice Amol Rattan Singh asserted.

The notice, issued by the Bench, was accepted by Punjab Deputy Advocate-General Ramdeep Partap Singh on behalf of the respondent-state. Sood, earlier during the proceedings, referred to “exception 2 to Section 375 of the IPC”, which defined rape. Sood submitted the exception made it clear that sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own wife, when the wife was not under 15 years of age, was not rape.

He added the other offence, alleged to have been committed by the other two petitioners, was that of criminal conspiracy punishable under Section 120-B of the IPC. When the first offence itself could not statutorily stand, the question of offence punishable under Section 120-B of the IPC also could not stand, Sood added.

The petitioners were seeking the quashing of an FIR registered on May 16, 2019, under Section 376 and 120-B of the IPC at Hoshiarpur police station. Directions were also sought for quashing all subsequent proceedings “being illegal and gross misuse of the process of law”.

Sood contended it was trite law that the wife above 15 could not file a case under Section 376 of the IPC against the husband. This, the survival of the FIR, was itself illegal and deserved to be quashed. The basis on which the police registered the case against the petitioners was shocking.

The FIR was nothing, but gross misuse of the process of law by the complainant-wife “for certain ulterior reasons” which were apparent from the facts of the case. “Thus, the same is liable to be quashed at the onset,” Sood added.

Before parting with the case, Justice Amol Rattan Singh added: “Naturally, despite the statutory provision pointed out by counsel for the petitioners, counsel for the parties would be required to address arguments as per the law settled so far on the issue”.

No offence after marriage: Petitioner

The petitioner-husband has claimed the offence of rape under Section 376 of the IPC was not made out against him as the respondent-complainant was his legally wedded wife and admittedly “both made physical relations after marriage”.