Section 497 of the IPC should be repealed.

Originally posted by: ibnbatuta

" In such case the wife shall not be punishable as an abettor".

Why not? Lover boy was f**king himself or what.

Originally posted by: qwertyesque

I think this is correct interpretation.. the wife can't be punished as an abettor.. woman have all sorts of issues to deal with and the central one is "responsible for inviting trouble" by the way they dress, eye contacts.. etc.. i dont think they should be punished for that!!!

Originally posted by: krystal_watz

Following is the text of the law:

"Whoever has sexual intercourse with a person who is and whom he knows or has reason to believe to be the wife of another man, without the consent or connivance of that man, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, is guilty of the offence of adultery, and shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both. In such case the wife shall not be punishable as an abettor".



There are several problem areas that reside within the law. Firstly, adultery should not be a criminal offence. Secondly, the law is grossly secist on tbe count that it does not provide a wife with the oppurtunity to punish her husband's mistress, while the husband is allowed to take legal action against his wife's lover. In a way, this law reduces a married woman to the "property" of her husband.

So, there are two options available to rectify the situation:

-Scrap this law and make adultery a civil offence.

-Introduce a provision for legal action against a woman who has an affair with a married man.

Thoughts?

Originally posted by: qwertyesque

I think this is correct interpretation.. the wife can't be punished as an abettor.. woman have all sorts of issues to deal with and the central one is "responsible for inviting trouble" by the way they dress, eye contacts.. etc.. i dont think they should be punished for that!!!

Originally posted by: zorrro

First and foremost problem ought to be the words in bold 😲 What if the husband consents? Would it not be considered adultery in that case !!!???😕 The womans consent does not figure anywhere at all 😕

Originally posted by: Rehanism

That holds for sexual assaults and rape cases not for consensual affairs. In cases of adultery who seduced whom is irrelevant.

IMO the party (be it husband or wife) who is in a relationship and cheats is more culpable than the party with whom s/he cheats.

On the topic, I think most Indian laws concerning marriage, divorce and relationships are highly archaic in spirit. Even the laws that allegedly favour women (molestation laws, obscenity laws, the infamous 498A, etc) are product of a patriarchal mindset that views women as delicate objects of family and community's honour that needs to be protected in a paternalist manner. Unless that paternalism goes away from the minds of the legislatures and law keepers true equality is not possible.