IPC Section 377: Oral, An*l S*x Between Married Couple Do Not Constitute ‘Unnatural Offence’, Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that s*xual acts between a husband and wife, including oral or an*l s*x, cannot be prosecuted as “unnatural offences” under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). In an order dated March 25, 2026, Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke clarified that the current legal framework governing marital relationships exempts such acts from these specific criminal charges.
Ujjain, March 26: The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that s*xual acts between a husband and wife, including oral or an*l s*x, cannot be prosecuted as “unnatural offences” under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). In an order dated March 25, 2026, Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke clarified that the current legal framework governing marital relationships exempts such acts from these specific criminal charges. The Court noted that even if the allegations of painful s*xual acts are taken at face value, they occur within a subsisting marriage and thus fall under existing legal exceptions.
The ruling came while the Court was hearing a plea from a man seeking to quash a criminal case involving allegations of dowry harassment, physical abuse, and s*xual assault. While the Court quashed the specific charge under Section 377, it refused to dismiss other serious charges against the husband and his parents. The case will proceed regarding allegations of dowry-related cruelty (Section 498A), criminal intimidation, and physical assault.
The Legal Intersection of Section 375 and 377
The High Court’s decision centered on the 2013 amendments to India's criminal law, which expanded the definition of rape under Section 375 to include various forms of non-vaginal penetration. However, Section 375 contains "Exception 2," which states that s*xual acts by a husband with his adult wife do not constitute rape.
The Court reasoned that since these acts are technically defined under the broader umbrella of "rape" but are specifically exempted within marriage, they cannot be siphoned off and prosecuted separately as "unnatural s*x" under Section 377. This interpretation aligns with the principle that consent within a legal marriage remains a complex, exempt area under current Indian statutes.
The complainant alleged that her husband and his family subjected her to harassment and threats following demands for an additional INR 6 lakh and a motorcycle. She further accused her husband of forcing her into painful s*xual acts and alleged that her father-in-law had inappropriately threatened her with a firearm.
While the defense argued that the claims were exaggerated and inconsistent with previous maintenance proceedings, the High Court maintained that disputed facts must be settled during a full trial. Consequently, while the "unnatural offence" charge was dropped, the husband, father-in-law, and mother-in-law must still face trial for the remaining allegations of cruelty and domestic abuse.
This ruling reinforces the "marital rape exception" that currently exists in the Indian legal system. By quashing the Section 377 charge, the Court emphasized that the law as it stands makes the aspect of consent "legally immaterial" for the purpose of prosecuting such acts as rape or unnatural offences within a marriage.
However, the Court was careful to note that this does not grant immunity for other forms of mistreatment. The proceedings against the husband’s sister-in-law were quashed due to a lack of specific evidence, but the primary accused parties remain under investigation for their alleged role in dowry-related violence and criminal intimidation.
(The above story first appeared on LatestLY on Mar 26, 2026 06:56 PM IST. For more news and updates on politics, world, sports, entertainment and lifestyle, log on to our website latestly.com).