Indian Penal Code section 497 – the constitutional validity of section 497 of IPC and section 198(2)of Criminal Procedure Code – Public Interest education filed  by the petitioner on the ground of constitutionality of the said section – petition allowed.

 

JOSEPH SHINE……………..( PETITIONER)

 

                                VERSUS

 

UNION OF INDIA…………….(RESPONDENT)

 

JUDGEMENT DELIVERED BY- DIPAK MISHRA CJ, AM KHANWILKAR, J, DY CHANDRACHUD, INDU MALHOTRA, J, RF NARIMAN, J

 

BRIEF FACTS

The Public Interest litigation filed under Article 32 of the constitution of India on the ground that section 497 of Indian penal code is prima facie unconstitutional in nature for the reason that it discriminates against men and curtails the fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 14, 15, 21 of the constitution of India.

ISSUES INVOLVED

·    That the Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is unconstitutional,  illegal in nature and curtailing the provisions of Article 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

      Whether the Section 198(2) of the constitution of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 is unconstitutional , arbitrary and Violative of fundamental rights guaranteed by the part lll of the Constitution of India.

RULES INVOLVED

Article 14, 15, 21, Article 32, Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, RULESion 198(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure.

REFERRED CASE LAWS

Pawan Kumar V. State of Himachal Pradesh(2015): The court dealing with the concept of equality and the dignity of a woman, and observed- In a civilized society ever – teasing is causing harassment to women in public places, parks, railways stations and women has not been socially cultivated. It affects the fundamental concept of gender sensitivity and justice a d the rights of women under Article 14 of the constitution.

R v.R – 24 Lord Keith observed: Marriage is in Modern times regarded as a partnership of equals, and no longer one in which the wife must be subservient chattel of the husband.

Yusuf Abdul Aziz V. State of Bombay(1954): The court held that wife shall not be Punishable as an abettor of the offence of adultery.

JUDGEMENT

Considering all the facts and arguments of the learned  counsel from both sides, the Court struck down section 497 as unconstitutional and illegal for the reason that it is Violative of Article 14, 15 and  21 of the Constitution of India and court further that section 198(2) 2shall be  unconstitutional as it extend to the applicability in section 497 of IPC.

ANALYSIS

The court is seeing this very clearly the provision is currently under criticism from certain quarters for Showing string gender bias for it makes the position of a married woman almost as property of her husband in the very landmark judgement of KS puttaswamy the court has set 3 fold requirement first,  legally, which postulates the existence of law (ii) need define in terms of illegitimate state interest and third proportionality which insures rational nexus between the object and the means adopted, section 497 as it is stand today fails to meet all the three  requirements  and must therefore be struck down.

CONCLUSION

In the view of the aforesaid discussion and the anomalous in section  497 it is declared that (i) section 497 is a struck down as unconstitutional being Violative  of Article 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution of India. (ii) the section 198 (2) of the code of Criminal procedure which contains the procedure for the prosecution under this  chapter shall be only in extend that it is applicable to the offence of adultery under Section 497 of the IPC. (iii) the decision in Sowmithri Vishnu Revathi and w Kalyani hereby stand overruled.