Karnataka government supports High Court verdict upholding marital rape charges against husband

The Karnataka government has supported the March 23 judgment of the Karnataka High Court which had declined to quash the charge of rape framed under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against a man accused of raping and keeping his wife as a sex slave. [Hrishikesh Sahoo v. State of Karnataka].."From the bare reading of amended provision of Section 375, the complainant clearly invokes the amended provision. Hence the said point is held in favour of the prosecution and against the petitioner," reads the reply by the State of Karnataka in the Supreme Court. .The State has also submitted that the charges invoked against the petitioner under the Protection of Children Against Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act for his alleged acts committed on his daughter also do not warrant any interference."In the circumstances the High Court has correctly dismissed the writ petition exercising it's jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code," the government's reply stated..A Bench of then Chief Justice of India NV Ramana and Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli had earlier stayed the proceedings arising out of the First Information Report (FIR) pending before the Additional City and Sessions Court..The High Court order rendered by Justice M Nagaprasanna came in an appeal filed by the husband against a sessions judge order framing charges of rape against him.In its order upholding the charges, the High Court had said that the institution of marriage cannot be used to confer any special male privilege or a license for unleashing of a "brutal beast" on the wife.While upholding the charge of rape against the husband, the Court noted that it is not pronouncing on whether marital rape should be recognized as an offence, and that it was concerned only with the charge of rape being framed against the husband in the present case.In the present case, after a few years of living together, the relationship of the couple had become strained. After he repeatedly inflicted physical and mental torture on his wife and his child, the wife registered a complaint against the husband for offences punishable under Sections 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation) 498A (cruelty to wife) 323 (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt) 377 (Unnatural offences) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 10 (aggravated sexual assault) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO).