The Supreme Court made it clear on Monday, September 7, 2026, that it will not rush to lock in a final hearing timeline on marital rape without first hearing directly from the Union government. Addressing a batch of petitions challenging legal exceptions that shield husbands from prosecution, the top court deferred setting dates until the Centre clarifies its stance.
Procedural Delays and Calls for a November Hearing
Senior advocate Indira Jaising, representing a woman petitioner seeking her husband's prosecution, pressed the bench to slate the constitutional challenge for November. She pointed out that while the matter is listed for September 9, substantive paperwork remains pending across opposing sides.
“Union has not filed a reply, except a preliminary objection. I am asking for a fixed date of hearing in November. We have not exchanged the petitions. We don't know the commonality or differences,” Jaising submitted before the bench.
The Chief Justice declined an immediate listing, emphasizing proper sequence: “Matter is listed on Wednesday (September 9). Union will appear. We will see what they say, and then we will fix a suitable date accordingly.” Senior advocate Karuna Nundy, appearing for another petitioner, concurred that a firm date should be scheduled to complete the exchange of pleadings.
Key Milestones in the Legal Challenge
The legal challenge examines whether shielding non-consensual sexual acts within marriage violates fundamental constitutional protections, including equality under Article 14.
| Date | Judicial Event / Development |
|---|---|
| May 11, 2022 | Delhi High Court delivers split verdict; grants certificate of leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. |
| January 16, 2023 | Supreme Court issues notice seeking the Centre's response on IPC Section 375 challenge. |
| July 1, 2024 | Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) takes effect, retaining the marital rape exception under Section 63. |
| September 7, 2026 | Supreme Court defers setting a November hearing date pending the Centre's appearance on September 9. |
The Shift from IPC to Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
The constitutional questions have simmered since the Delhi High Court's divided ruling in May 2022. In that judgment, Justice Rajiv Shakdher deemed the exception unconstitutional, observing that it would be tragic if a married woman's plea went unanswered after 162 years under the penal code. Conversely, Justice C. Hari Shankar upheld the clause, ruling it rested on intelligible differentia. Earlier, the Karnataka High Court held that shielding husbands from rape charges conflicted with constitutional equality.
With both the colonial-era IPC and the newly enacted BNS provisions now challenged before the apex court, all eyes turn to Wednesday's hearing to see whether the Centre will finally file a comprehensive response on the merits.
Comments