Supreme Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Constitutionality of Adultery Provisions. The court found that the law does not discriminate against women as both spouses are barred from prosecuting each other for adultery under Section 198 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

  • 8
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved a challenge to the constitutional validity of Section 198 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which restricts the right to prosecute for adultery. The petitioner, a wife, argued that it was discriminatory to deny her the right to prosecute her husband for adultery while allowing a husband to prosecute his wife. The court examined the provisions of Section 198(1) and Section 198(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code in conjunction with Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code, which defines adultery and limits prosecution rights. The court noted that the law does not allow either spouse to prosecute the other, aiming to promote reconciliation rather than criminal proceedings. The court referenced previous judgments, including Sowmithri Vishnu v. Union of India, to support its reasoning that the law does not discriminate against women but rather maintains a balance by preventing both spouses from using criminal law against each other. Ultimately, the court dismissed the petition, affirming that the provisions were not unconstitutional and did not constitute hostile discrimination against women.

Headnote

A) Constitutional Law - Discrimination - Hostile Discrimination in Adultery Provisions - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 14 - The petitioner contended that the law's restriction on a wife prosecuting her adulterous husband constituted discrimination based on sex. The court held that the law does not permit either spouse to prosecute the other for adultery, promoting social good by allowing them to resolve issues outside of criminal courts. Thus, the provisions were not unconstitutional (Paras 77-79).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the provisions of Section 198(1) and Section 198(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, which restrict the right to prosecute for adultery, amount to hostile discrimination against women under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, affirming that the provisions of Section 198 of the Criminal Procedure Code do not discriminate against women and maintain a balance by preventing both spouses from prosecuting each other for adultery.

Law Points

  • Constitutional validity
  • discrimination
  • adultery
  • prosecution rights
  • Criminal Procedure Code
  • Indian Penal Code
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

1988 LawText (SC) (02) 32

Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 562 of 1986

1988-02-25

Thakkar, M.P., Dutt, M.M.

1988 AIR 835, 1988 SCR (3) 73, 1988 SCC (2) 72, JT 1988 (1) 419, 1988 SCALE (1) 420

Ms. Geetha Ramaseshan, Ms. Seita Vaidilingam, D.N. Dwivedi, Ashok K. Srivastava, S. Suri

V. Revathi

Union of India & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Challenge to the constitutional validity of provisions regarding adultery prosecution.

Remedy Sought

The petitioner sought the right to prosecute her husband for adultery.

Filing Reason

The petitioner argued that the law discriminated against her based on sex.

Previous Decisions

The court referenced Sowmithri Vishnu v. Union of India, which addressed similar issues.

Issues

Constitutionality of Section 198 of the Criminal Procedure Code Discrimination against women in prosecution rights

Submissions/Arguments

The petitioner argued for equal rights to prosecute for adultery. The respondents contended that the law promotes social good by preventing mutual prosecution.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the law does not permit either spouse to prosecute the other for adultery, thereby not constituting discrimination against women, as both are equally barred from using criminal law against each other.

Judgment Excerpts

The law does not envisage the punishment of any of the spouses at the instance of each other. There is thus reverse discrimination in 'favour' of the woman rather than 'against' her.

Procedural History

The petition was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India challenging the constitutional validity of Section 198 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 14
  • Criminal Procedure Code: Section 198(1), Section 198(2)
  • Indian Penal Code: Section 497
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Union of India's Appeal in IMTRAT Allowance Parity Case. High Court's Clarification on Parity Between Bhutan Compensatory Allowance and Foreign Allowance Upheld as Within Scope of Original Order.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Order Setting Aside Election of Councilor for Non-Disclosure of Criminal Cases. Failure to Disclose Pending Criminal Cases in Affidavit Under Section 5A of Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, ...