In the intricate tapestry of Indian criminal law, few provisions have sparked as much debate, introspection, and eventual transformation as Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Previously, this now-defunct statute sought to criminalize adultery—specifically, intercourse between a man and a married woman without her husband’s consent. However, a landmark Supreme Court decision in 2018 altered the legal and social landscape around the subject, marking a critical juncture in India’s approach to personal liberty and gender equality.
Section 497 IPC, enacted during British colonial rule in 1860, read in essence: “Whoever has sexual intercourse with a person who is and whom he knows or has reason to believe to be the wife of another man, without the consent or connivance of that man, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, is guilty of adultery.” The male offender faced punishment of up to five years in prison or a fine, or both. Notably, the provision did not recognize women as offenders or even as abettors.
This asymmetry in legal responsibility reflected the prevailing patriarchal ethos. The husband was treated as the sole aggrieved party, and a wife’s autonomy remained legally invisible.
“Section 497 IPC was a glaring example of Victorian morality enshrined in law, treating women as property rather than individuals with independent agency.”—Annie John, constitutional lawyer
Criticism of Section 497 simmered for decades within Indian legal and academic circles. Besides being discriminatory towards women, the law criminalized a private, consensual act—raising questions of privacy, autonomy, and equality before the law.
Several legal thinkers pointed out internal contradictions in the statute:
International human rights conventions and evolving global standards amplified these critiques, with many countries having decriminalized adultery or treated it only as grounds for civil action rather than a criminal offense.
In 2017, a petition by Joseph Shine, a non-resident Keralite, challenged the constitutional validity of Section 497 IPC. The Supreme Court’s five-judge bench, led by then-Chief Justice Dipak Misra, heard impassioned arguments on whether the law violated fundamental rights.
Key arguments included:
On September 27, 2018, the Supreme Court unanimously struck down Section 497 IPC as unconstitutional. The judgment recognized the law as:
As the Court famously stated:
“The time when wives were invisible to the law is long past. Section 497 is manifestly arbitrary, and the sovereignty of a woman over her own body and her sexuality has to be recognized.”—Supreme Court of India, Joseph Shine v. Union of India, 2018
No longer would adultery constitute a criminal offense; it would instead remain solely a ground for civil divorce or separation.
The judgment represented a seismic cultural shift, emphasizing personal autonomy and gender parity. By declaring that “husbands are not the masters” of their wives, the apex court reasserted that marriage does not entail the surrender of constitutional rights.
Women’s rights advocates hailed the move as a victory against patriarchal legacies. Civil society organizations also highlighted its practical impact: reducing potential abuse of the law in marital disputes and recognizing both partners’ equal standing and privacy.
Nevertheless, the decision also sparked debate among conservative circles, with some arguing that decriminalization could erode the sanctity of marriage. However, empirical studies and international experience suggest that criminal sanctions rarely strengthen marital fidelity but often lead to extortion, misuse, or coerced settlements.
In practice, the focus of the law shifted from punishment to resolution—encouraging spouses to deal with infidelity through civil remedies rather than seeking criminal prosecution.
Across the world, attitudes towards adultery have shifted decisively in the last few decades. Major democracies such as the United Kingdom, United States (most states), Canada, and much of Western Europe have either abolished criminal sanctions for adultery or never imposed them.
In contrast, some countries in West Asia, Africa, and South-East Asia retain adultery as a criminal offense, often with severe penalties. India’s move to strike down Section 497 IPC placed it in line with progressive democracies that separate matters of personal morality from the domain of criminal law.
While Section 497 IPC no longer stands, adultery is still relevant in India as a ground for civil remedies—especially divorce or judicial separation—regulated under the Hindu Marriage Act, Special Marriage Act, and other relevant statutes. This distinction underscores the shift away from criminalizing private moral choices to protecting individual rights and due process.
The striking down of Section 497 IPC marked a pivotal moment in India’s constitutional journey. By affirming the principles of equality, privacy, and autonomy in marriage, the Supreme Court set a new benchmark for interpreting personal liberty and gender justice.
What remains is an ongoing conversation about the boundaries of law, individual rights, and social norms—a conversation that will continue to shape both family law and broader civil rights for years to come.
What was Section 497 IPC?
Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code criminalized adultery, specifically targeting a man who had consensual sexual relations with a married woman without her husband’s consent. Only the male partner could be prosecuted, not the woman.
Is adultery still a criminal offense in India?
No, after the Supreme Court’s 2018 verdict in Joseph Shine v. Union of India, adultery is no longer a criminal offense. It may, however, still be used as grounds for divorce in civil court.
Why was Section 497 repealed?
The Supreme Court found it discriminatory and contrary to the rights to equality and privacy. It treated women unequally and allowed husbands, but not wives, to initiate criminal proceedings.
Can adultery still affect divorce proceedings?
Yes, adultery remains a valid ground for seeking divorce or judicial separation under Indian family law, even though it is no longer a crime.
Did the judgment affect other personal laws?
While the ruling was specifically about Section 497 IPC, it influenced interpretations of gender and privacy rights across various personal and family law domains.
What are the broader implications of the repeal?
The repeal is widely seen as supporting gender equality, safeguarding personal privacy, and modernizing the Indian legal approach to marriage and personal relationships.
Within the intricate landscape of Indian family law, Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act…
Indian criminal law is known for its breadth and depth, addressing a multitude of scenarios…
The principle of double jeopardy stands as one of the oldest and most vital safeguards…
Article 38 of the Indian Constitution is a cornerstone of India's moral vision, enshrined as…
Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), often referred to in Hindi as "302…
Few legal cases have shaped contemporary Indian constitutional law as profoundly as the Maneka Gandhi…