Consensual sex with minor wife is also rape: Bombay high court

[-]

Familiar_Internet@reddit

India does not allow marriage for minors, we have different marriage laws for different religions.

The Hindu Marriage Act is applicable to Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists where the legal age of marriage for women in 18 (proposed to be increased to 21).

The Special Marriage Act for interfaith couples incase one of them does not convert before the marriage here also the legal age of marriage for women in 18 (proposed to be increased to 21).

Muslim Personal Law (Shariat Act) is applicable for Muslims where the legal age of marriage is decided by the Islamic scholars, for which the legal age of marriage for women is any age after puberty.

[-]

TENTAtheSane@reddit

Muslim groups are already spinning this as an attack on muslims' minorty rights.

[-]

AgileCaregiver7300@reddit

Muslim Personal Law (Shariat Act) is applicable for Muslims where the legal age of marriage is decided by the Islamic scholars, for which the legal age of marriage for women is any age after puberty.

Considering the age of puberty can be less than 10, absolutely disgusting.

But then again we all know how Mohammed married Aisha at 6, so not too surprising.

[-]

ahappydayinlalaland@reddit

If you're going to slander a religion at least do it properly. Aisha was 9 at the time of marriage, not 6. She was betrothed to the prophet at 6.

[-]

TENTAtheSane@reddit

Ahh that's completely different, perfectly normal then

[-]

ahappydayinlalaland@reddit

Pederasty has been common place all over the planet throughout human history. Its gross, but its not unique enough to condemn Muslims for. Sati on the other hand...

[-]

pigeon_shit_evrywhre@reddit

Pederasty

new word, let me look it up...

Pederasty or paederasty is a sexual relationship between an adult man and a boy

Oh boy. Bro are you calling muhammad a gay pedo?

[-]

matomika@reddit

ah thats why, the american version cuts the words history.

[-]

ahappydayinlalaland@reddit

I'm definitely calling him a pedophile.

[-]

AgileCaregiver7300@reddit

Except it's literally happening among the muslims in India as we can see here. And partially because their pedophile leader raped a 9 year old repeatedly.

[-]

polymute@reddit (OP)

Except it's literally happening among the muslims in India as we can see here.

The people in this article are not Muslim (we don't know their religion but none is implied except that they exchanged garlands at a mock wedding which is not particularly Muslim, if anything it's Hindu. On of the crimes committed is pretending to have fradulently marry someone who was raped, so is desperate, and is underinformed as well). Read it.

The Hindutva accounts are just using this to push their agenda. If anything, what we can read from the ceremony and the demographics of Bombay makes it the most likely (though not certain) that the perpetrator and the victim are both Hindus.

[-]

Far_Advertising1005@reddit

Something being common doesn’t make it ok, and it just looks like you’re defending pedophilia.

Also, ritual suicide is extremely common throughout history lol. Even with your own argument you’re being silly.

[-]

ahappydayinlalaland@reddit

Sari is fucked but is also voluntary

Lol

[-]

AgileCaregiver7300@reddit

Thanks so did mohammed and his men fuck 9 year old girls all the time? Or was it only for special occasions?

[-]

IchBinMalade@reddit

slander

https://youtu.be/XscaGDxuQqE?t=5

In any case, uh, it's neither slander nor libel, since, well, it's true.

It's always funny when someone tries to do the "she wasn't 6, she was 9 akchuyally" bit. Ah yes, much better, guess Mo was a great guy after all.

[-]

AgileCaregiver7300@reddit

Exactly this.

[-]

TENTAtheSane@reddit

You should ask Him(pubg)

[-]

AgileCaregiver7300@reddit

I don't need to ask. He raped at least one 9 year old repeatedly.

[-]

polymute@reddit (OP)

UCC

?

[-]

roy1979@reddit

There was no marriage in this case, not sure why you had to bring this up.

[-]

gobiSamosa@reddit

The victim, unaware of the law, thought that she was married to the perpetrator.

[-]

polymute@reddit (OP)

The man whose criminal appeal was being heard by the Bombay high court was arrested on May 25, 2019 after the complainant, a minor girl, who was 31 weeks pregnant back then, lodged a case against him. The girl alleging that they were in a love affair and that man had forcible sexual intercourse with her, adding that he later on continued with the same on a false promise of marriage.

The girl then conceived and asked the man get married to her, however, he performed something that was more of a fraud. The man rented a house and, in the presence of neighbours there, exchanged garlands with the girl, making her believe that she was his wife, as per the LiveLaw report.

The man whose criminal appeal was being heard by the Bombay high court was arrested on May 25, 2019 after the complainant, a minor girl, who was 31 weeks pregnant back then, lodged a case against him. The girl alleging that they were in a love affair and that man had forcible sexual intercourse with her, adding that he later on continued with the same on a false promise of marriage.

The girl then conceived and asked the man get married to her, however, he performed something that was more of a fraud. The man rented a house and, in the presence of neighbours there, exchanged garlands with the girl, making her believe that she was his wife, as per the LiveLaw report.

However, the man then started insisting the girl to terminate the pregnancy. The man assaulted her after she refused abortion. She then went to her parents' house and man assaulted her twice there as well.

[-]

TENTAtheSane@reddit

Uniform Civil Code is currently a very big political controversy. The muslim angle comes because child marriage is illegal for every community in india except muslims, for whom it is allowed. This makes it obvious to anyone who knows it which community would be involved in a legal case talking of consensual sex with a minor wife. For any other community, it does not even count as a marriage.

Also, adding the following, since you asked me what UCC was in a previous comment and deleted it immediately.

Basically in india, every person has to follow the same criminal laws drafted by the legislative. But for the civil laws, the legislative is only allowed to draft them for the majority hindu population. Minority groups like muslims, christians, sikhs, etc have their own (unelected) legal leaders who can choose whether to also adopt the individual laws, or to just use their own religious ones.

Sikhs for example use this to circumvent the mandate of helmets in traffic laws, as their turbans wouldn't fit inside and provide enough protection anyway. But muslims use this extensively for laws related to marriage, divorce and inheritence. Stuff like polygamy and child marriage, which are illegal for most indians, are allowed for muslims as per this.

The current govt has long campaigned against this and of late has been talking of repealing this provision. However this will be very hard as minority groups, especially muslims, may react badly to such major changes.

[-]

PerunVult@reddit

Basically in india, every person has to follow the same criminal laws drafted by the legislative. But for the civil laws, the legislative is only allowed to draft them for the majority hindu population. Minority groups like muslims, christians, sikhs, etc have their own (unelected) legal leaders who can choose whether to also adopt the individual laws, or to just use their own religious ones.

So this case hinges on criminal-civil distinction? Fact that marriage with underage girl might be legal for muslims due to parallel civil laws, but consummation of such marriage remains rape (statutory rape?) because it falls under criminal code?

[-]

TENTAtheSane@reddit

I don't know about this particular case. Possibly nothing to do with it idk. I was only speaking to the person who brought up UCC.

But yeah, such cases usually do. And it sucks how common they are that there's a "usually".

Iirc it was also this similar logic behind the Triple Talak case verdict, a landmark case where the government banned certain types of extra-judicial divorces from the shariat law, which a rare occurrence for the govt (might be the first time the govt touched it)

[-]

polymute@reddit (OP)

No, this case has nothing to do with Muslims. See here: https://www.reddit.com/r/anime_titties/comments/1gvspvd/consensual_sex_with_minor_wife_is_also_rape/ly4py5d/

The Indian accounts are pushing an agenda even bringing up religion at all.

[-]

polymute@reddit (OP)

I just googled it, thought it was faster. But only by a little as it turns out, you fingers over at the keyboard and you do write fast! clap clap

[-]

roy1979@reddit

The girl then conceived and asked the man get married to her, however, he performed something that was more of a fraud. The man rented a house and, in the presence of neighbours there, exchanged garlands with the girl, making her believe that she was his wife, as per the LiveLaw report.

What are you trying to prove here? Did you read the article before posting?

[-]

polymute@reddit (OP)

Sorry, I posted the quotation without my actual comment at first, I think you've only seen that. The copy-paste overwrote it and I didn't notice.

[-]

roy1979@reddit

Ah, ok. No problem.

[-]

polymute@reddit (OP)

Thanks!

[-]

protomenace@reddit

The idea of having different rules for different religious groups is wild.

[-]

Familiar_Internet@reddit

Pretty sure we are going to combine them into one uniform law, muslim personal laws have been abused for child marriage, polygamy and instant divorce w no alimony. Similarly hindu personal laws have been used to save income taxes in businesses.

The tribals will be kept out of the uniform laws, sort of the same way Native Americans have their own civil rights in the states.

[-]

Gayandfluffy@reddit

Are the marriage laws for atheists the same as the religio-cultural community they come from or do they have separate laws? Sorry if this is a dumb question.

[-]

Familiar_Internet@reddit

Generally you can take benefits of personal laws depending upon your ancestry, however if you are a staunch atheist then you can marry using the Special Marriage Act as it can be used by anyone, even between two religious people.

[-]

Rollen73@reddit

Your submission has been removed as it violates:

Rule 2.3 (US/China/India content restriction: the 50%).

Make sure to check our sidebar from time to time as it provides detailed submission guidelines and may change.

Please feel free to send us a modmail if you have any questions or concerns.

[-]

socandindv@reddit

While I do agree that Muslim Personal Law allowing for such possibilities to be legal is a sham and I wholeheartedly push for Uniform Civil Code, this case probably involves a Hindu man judging by the exchange of garlands.

Judging by the fact that the girl was opposed to abortion and was more concerned with fraudulent marriage than rape, it’s highly possible that the girl is from a poor uneducated family who taught her that marriage is the only future for girls.

While this is not a prevalent opinion in current Indian society, there are many pockets of culture where it is believed that women don’t have any meaning in their life except for serving her husband and children and that is the centre of cases like this. It is easy life for sexual predators when girls are pre-brainwashed and will offer themselves as long as they get to be married and leave their abusive families.

[-]

Atheizm@reddit

This is good news. The more appeals from child rapists are struck down, the better. India needs to get rid of its vile exceptions to it's marriage laws. There is no special case for raping children even if the raped child is your spouse. Belonging to a religion that exonerates and sacralised the rape of children is not justification.

[-]

empleadoEstatalBot@reddit

Consensual sex with minor wife is also rape: Bombay high court

Nov 15, 2024 01:25 PM IST

The HC was hearing an appeal filed by a man challenging a verdict of a trial court, which convicted him under charges of rape and provisions of the POCSO Act.

A man's consensual sexual intercourse with his wife, if she is below the age of 18 years, can get him booked for the offence of rape, irrespective of the wife's consent, the Bombay high court said in a major ruling on November 12.
 [Stating that the age of consent is above 18, HC said, "It needs to be stated that sexual intercourse with a girl below 18 years of age is rape, regardless of whether she is married or not”.(Shutterstock/Representative)](https://www.hindustantimes.com/ht-img/img/2024/11/15/550x309/bombay_high_court__1731655182786_1731655182990.jpg "Stating that the age of consent is above 18, HC said, "It needs to be stated that sexual intercourse with a girl below 18 years of age is rape, regardless of whether she is married or not”.(Shutterstock/Representative)")   Stating that the age of consent is above 18, HC said, "It needs to be stated that sexual intercourse with a girl below 18 years of age is rape, regardless of whether she is married or not”.(Shutterstock/Representative)
Single-judge bench of Justice Govind Sanap was hearing a criminal appeal filed by a man challenging a September 9, 2021 verdict of a trial court in Wardha district, which convicted him under charges of rape and provisions of the Protection Of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

Upholding the conviction, Justice Sanap rejected the man's argument that the sexual intercourse with the victim was consensual and cannot amount to rape since she was his wife at the relevant time.

Stating that the age of consent is above 18, justice Sanap said, "It needs to be stated that sexual intercourse with a girl below 18 years of age is rape, regardless of whether she is married or not”.

Also read: Man kills daughter, wife for not taking back Pocso case in Delhi

"In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court, intercourse by the appellant with the victim being his wife would not constitute rape or penetrative sexual assault, cannot be accepted. It needs to be stated that the sexual intercourse with a girl below 18 years of age is rape regardless of whether she is married or not," LiveLaw quoted the judge as saying in the order.

What Bombay HC said

Justice Sanap said the defence of consensual sex with the wife is not available, when the age of the wife or the girl who is alleged to be the wife is below 18 years of age. Non-consensual intercourse with a wife, who is below 18 years of age, is a rape, the judge added.

In view of the Supreme Court ruling, the judge said that in this the defence of consensual sex with the wife cannot be accepted. "Even if it is assumed for the sake of argument that there was so called marriage between them, in view of the allegations made by the victim that it was sexual intercourse against her consent, it would constitute rape," the judge was quoted as saying.

Also read: Bombay high court says booking, entering a hotel room does not mean ‘consent for sex’

The man whose criminal appeal was being heard by the Bombay high court was arrested on May 25, 2019 after the complainant, a minor girl, who was 31 weeks pregnant back then, lodged a case against him. The girl alleging that they were in a love affair and that man had forcible sexual intercourse with her, adding that he later on continued with the same on a false promise of marriage.

The girl then conceived and asked the man get married to her, however, he performed something that was more of a fraud. The man rented a house and, in the presence of neighbours there, exchanged garlands with the girl, making her believe that she was his wife, as per the LiveLaw report.

However, the man then started insisting the girl to terminate the pregnancy. The man assaulted her after she refused abortion. She then went to her parents' house and man assaulted her twice there as well.

The girl then realised that the man performed a fraudulent marriage and sexually exploited her.

Get Current Updates on...

See more

Maintainer | Creator | Source Code
Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot

[-]

coverageanalysisbot@reddit

Hi empleadoEstatalBot,

We've found 10 sources (so far) that are covering this story including:

The Hindu (Leans Left): "Sexual intercourse with minor wife amounts to rape, says Bombay HC"
Live Mint (Center): "Bombay High Court rules consensual sex with underage wife as ‘rape’"
Latestly (Right): "HC on Sex With Minor Wife: Man Having Consensual Sexual Intercourse With Wife Under 18 Can Be Booked for Rape, Says Bombay High Court | 📰 LatestLY"

Of all the sources reporting on this story, 29% are right-leaning, 57% are left-leaning, and 14% are in the center. Read the full coverage analysis and compare how 10+ sources from across the political spectrum are covering this story.

I’m a bot. Read here to learn how it works or message us with any feedback so we can improve the bot for you.