Pleas Challenging Marital Rape Exception : Live Updates From Supreme Court

Nandy refers to S. 2(24) of BNS

CJI: how do you summarise in two lines that you are not creating an offence?

CJI : why is your junior standing? she can sit down, Mr Gopal you can also sit down 

CJI: if a husband inserts any object into woman's vagina, if done by any other person would be rape, but just because its husband , it would not be rape

CJI: when the exception 2 provides for exception for sexual intercourse or sexual acts - its not just the peno-vaginal act

Nandy: in case of simple hurt 323 may be invoked .....the crux is - if the nonconsensual act of penetration would not be covered, the other concomitant acts may be covered

CJI: the offence of rape after 2013 amendment does cover only peno-vaginal act 

Nandy: I may be in a live in relationship, the man has sex with me without consent it will be rape, I may wake up and say lets move on - it will be still rape

CJI: There is an assumption (in S.67 BNS) of offence , but if within fold of marriage is not an offence

Nandy: there is no intelligible differentia in the range of harms ....the range of harm if you are repeatedly by my husband or seperated husband or stranger is NOT DIFFEREN

Nandy: when we speak of creation of new offence, the focus is offence....there are 3 classes created (1) class of rapists unrelated to victims; (2) spouse who commit sexual intercourse without consent in relation ; (3) a seperated husband

Nandy: the word 'offence' is defined very clearly under S.2(1)(q) of BNS

Bench resumes

CJI: you are saying it violates right to equality, gender freedom

CJI: parliament intended that the act of sexual intercourse with wife above 18 yrs is not rape, if we strike down the exception, will we be creating a new offence?