Ex-CJI Chandrachud said Indian law still does not allow a wife to complain of marital rape and admitted this was his biggest regret. He said the law must change, even as men continue to face criminal liability for other acts within marriage without equal legal clarity.
RAJASTHAN: Former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud has openly spoken about what he described as his “biggest regret” during his time as the head of the judiciary. Speaking in Jaipur, he said he was disappointed that he could not deal with a case related to marital rape before his retirement and pointed out that the present law still gives immunity to husbands in such cases.
Chandrachud said that under the current legal framework, a woman subjected to non-consensual intercourse by her husband cannot file a complaint of marital rape, and according to him, this part of the law requires change. He clearly stated that the law has not kept pace with constitutional values even decades after Independence.
“Seventy-five years after Independence, marital rape is still not an offence. A husband who murders his wife is guilty of murder. A husband who grievously assaults his wife is guilty of grievous hurt and can be tried, convicted and sentenced. But a woman who is subjected to non-consensual intercourse cannot complain of marital rape. I think that part of the law has to change,”
-Chandrachud said.
He was speaking at the Jaipur Literature Festival in a conversation with journalist Vir Sanghvi. Chandrachud explained that a case related to marital rape came up just two weeks before his retirement, but he chose not to hear it due to concerns about fairness in the judicial process.
“The lawyers on one side felt that I was rushing them and that they had not been given enough time to argue. I said I never want to retire with the allegation that I did not give a fair hearing to one side. Therefore, I decided to pass on the matter to others,”
-he said.
He also spoke about decisions during his tenure that gave him satisfaction, particularly the move to make court proceedings more accessible to ordinary citizens. He said opening up the justice system to public viewing was an important step towards transparency.
“I tried to convert the Supreme Court into a people’s court. No case was too small for us, and no case was too big,”
-he said.
The Supreme Court of India had allowed live streaming of its proceedings in 2018, a move that was later expanded during his tenure. Chandrachud served as the 50th Chief Justice of India and retired on November 10, 2024.
While the debate on marital rape continues, his remarks have once again brought attention to how criminal law intervenes inside marriage, often selectively, raising larger questions about balance, fairness, and equal protection for all individuals affected by marital disputes under Indian law.
Explanatory Table: Laws & Sections Referred In The Statement
| Law / Section | What the Law Says (Simple Indian English) | How It Connects to This Case & Men’s Rights Reality |
| IPC Section 302 (Murder) | If a person intentionally causes death, it is murder and punishable with life imprisonment or death. | Even within marriage, a husband is fully criminally liable for murder. Law is already strict and gender-neutral here. |
| IPC Sections 325 / 326 (Grievous Hurt) | Causing serious bodily injury is a criminal offence with severe punishment. | Husbands can be arrested and convicted for physical harm. Existing laws already criminalise violence inside marriage. |
| IPC Section 498A (Cruelty by Husband or Relatives) | Punishes cruelty by husband or his family towards a wife. | Often cited in debates but widely reported as misused, with arrests made before trial and little accountability for false cases. |
| IPC Section 375 – Exception 2 (Marital Rape Exception) | Sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife is not treated as rape under current law (with limited exceptions). | This exception is criticised, but the debate ignores that men have no protection against false sexual allegations or marital abuse. |
| Constitution of India – Fair Trial Principle (Article 21) | Every person has a right to life and personal liberty, including a fair legal process. | Used by the former CJI to justify stepping aside, but rarely discussed when men face arrests, stigma, and trials based on unverified accusations. |
| Supreme Court Live Streaming (2018 decision) | Court proceedings can be watched by the public for transparency. | Transparency helps citizens, but public trials without safeguards can also amplify reputational damage to accused men later found innocent. |
Key Takeaways
- Criminal law already punishes husbands for murder, assault, and cruelty, yet public debate selectively frames marriage as a one-sided power structure without acknowledging rampant misuse of existing laws against men.
- Any call to change marital rape law is incomplete unless it simultaneously addresses false allegations, lack of safeguards, and irreversible damage to innocent men and families.
- Indian law still has no gender-neutral protection for men facing sexual coercion, domestic abuse, or fabricated cases inside marriage.
- Experience shows that loosely drafted criminal provisions are routinely weaponised during matrimonial disputes to force settlements, arrests, and social destruction of men.
- Legal reform without accountability, evidentiary safeguards, and penalties for misuse will only deepen injustice rather than deliver real equality.
This Could Change Your Case-Get FREE Legal Advice-Click Here!
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the Indian courts and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of “ShoneeKapoor.com” or its affiliates. This article is intended for informational and educational purposes only. The content provided is not legal advice, and viewers should not act upon this information without seeking professional counsel. Viewer discretion is advised.