Skip to main content

CASE REVIEW OF JOSEPH SHINE VS UOI

  

CASE REVIEW OF JOSEPH SHINE VS UOI

 

INTRODUCTION 

Adultery is illegal in India, according to section 497 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 497 has been challenged in court multiple times in the past, but each time the Supreme Court has upheld its validity. However, in the case of Joseph Shine v. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India struck down the 158-year-old Victorian morality statute prohibiting adultery on September 27, 2018.

 

FACTS

The legality of section 497 of the Indian Penal Code was challenged by hotelier Joseph Shine. The petition's main goal was to protect Indian men from being punished by vindictive women or their husbands for extramarital affairs. In Kerala, a close friend of the petitioner committed suicide after a female coworker accused him of rape.

COURTS JUDGEMENT

A three judge bench headed by then CJI Dipak Mishra had referred this petition to a five judge constitution bench which comprised of CJ Dipak Mishra, and Justices R.F Nariman, A.M Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud, and Indu Malhotra.

 

The court had observed that law is based on certain ‘Societal presumption’. In four different judgments, the court has struck down the law and declared that husband cannot be the master of his wife. The judgment held the following things:-

 

  1. Section 497 is archaic and is constitutionally invalid-

Section 497 disposes women from her autonomy, dignity and privacy. It is considered as the encroachment on her right to life and personal liberty by accepting the notion of marriage which overthrows the true equality. Equality is overthrow by adopting the sanctions of penal code to a gender based approach to the relationship of man and woman. Sexual autonomy falls within the area of personal liberty under article 21 of Constitution of India. It is very much important in a relationship the expectations that one has from the another. When both the spouses respect each other with equality and dignity then only the respect for sexual autonomy is established.

  1. Adultery is no longer be a criminal offence-

A crime is committed against the society as a whole whereas adultery is a personal issue. Adultery does not fit into the ambit of crime as it would otherwise invade the extreme privacy sphere of marriage. However, adultery can be considered as a civil wrong and is a valid ground for divorce.

 

  1. Husband is not the master of his wife-

The judgment focuses on the fact that women should not be considered as the property of their husband or father anymore. They have equal status in the society and should be given every opportunity to put their stance forward.

 



ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT 


The Supreme Court of India overturned section 497 of the Indian Penal Code in this case. The court imposed restrictions on the institution of marriage, which is the bedrock of Indian culture. Adultery-related offences will be eliminated as a result of this. This decision has resulted in sexual anarchy. Adultery is no longer regarded as a civil wrong, and it can only be used as a basis for divorce. However, the grounds are insufficiently compelling, and hence this cannot become Lex Loci. If adultery is not regarded a crime, divorce on this basis would be a fruitless endeavour. Criminal law is regarded as a defender of Indian society's moral norms. .If we start subjecting laws to our personal rationale, we'll end up with chaos, because there will always be a counter-narrative.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

INCOME TAX SECTION 32AD - Investment in new plant or machinery in notified backward areas in certain States

 Description (1) Where an assessee, sets up an undertaking or enterprise for manufacture or production of any article or thing, on or after the 1st day of April, 2015 in any backward area notified by the Central Government in this behalf, in the State of Andhra Pradesh or in the State of Bihar or in the State of Telangana or in the State of West Bengal, and acquires and installs any new asset for the purposes of the said undertaking or enterprise during the period beginning on the 1st day of April, 2015 and ending before the 1st day of April, 2020 in the said backward area, then, there shall be allowed a deduction of a sum equal to fifteen per cent of the actual cost of such new asset for the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which such new asset is installed. (2) If any new asset acquired and installed by the assessee is sold or otherwise transferred, except in connection with the amalgamation or demerger or re-organisation of business referred to in clause (xiii)or cla

60 Minute Marriage Counselling Session On Phone

Description A 60 minute phone call with an expert Marriage\Relationship Counselor to discuss your marriage\relationship related issues. Counselling aims to resolve issues and improve communication in a relationship. Couples’ counselling works with both people in the relationship, however sessions can start with one individual, working towards the involvement of the other partner. What's Included a) 60 minute phone call with the counselor where you can discuss all your issues and seek guidance. What's Not Included a) Counselling session via meeting

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B