Blog: Here's why the adultery law should be scrapped

The Supreme Court is hearing a PIL challenging constitutional validity of Section 497 of Indian Penal Code. “When the sexual intercourse takes place with the consent of both the parties, there is no good reason for excluding one party from the liability,” the PIL says.

According to the adultery provision, if a married man has sexual intercourse with a married woman, without consent of her husband, that amounts to offence of adultery.

The law clearly treats married men and married women differently - the man is treated as the culprit and can be jailed for up to five years, but the woman can get away as the victim.

Add WION as a Preferred Source

Another strange part is that the law permits woman's husband to file a complaint against the man she has sexual intercourse with, but there is no such provision for the wife of the adulterous man. She cannot file a complaint against her husband or the other woman.

There is more weirdness to it. Man's sexual relations with a widow, a sex worker or an unmarried woman is not considered an act of adultery. Wouldn't the man's wife be equally hurt irrespective of whether the other woman is a widow, unmarried woman or someone else's wife? Of course, it would still affect sanctity of marriage.

Another aspect of the provision, which has drawn strong criticism from the Supreme Court, says that no offence of adultery is made out if a married woman has sex with a consent from her husband. “If there is consent of husband, then there is no adultery which is absurd. This is another indicator of gender bias in which a woman is considered as chattel,” the court noted.

To make sleeping outside your wedlock an offence punishable under law is not wise. Both the partners are equally responsible to keep the sanctity of marriage intact. In some cases, a person is aware about his/her partner's relations outside marriage but they still choose to stay together - reasons for which may vary. And if someone is not okay with his/her spouse having sexualrelations with the third person, that individual can make adultery a ground for seeking divorce.

Supreme Court has already stated that the law is apparently violative of right to equality. It should now simply go ahead and scrap the 158-year-old law that is "inherently flawed".

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)