THE ARCHITECTURE OF LEGALISED IMPUNITY: A DOCTRINAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CRITIQUE OF INDIA’S MARITAL RAPE EXCEPTION
AUTHORS – ANSHU TRIPATHI* & DR. SUKRITI YADAV**
* STUDENT AT AMITY LAW SCHOOL, AMITY UNIVERSITY UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW CAMPUS
** ASSISTANT PROFESSOR AT AMITY LAW SCHOOL, AMITY UNIVERSITY UTTAR PRADESH, LUCKNOW CAMPUS
BEST CITATION – ANSHU TRIPATHI & DR. SUKRITI YADAV, THE ARCHITECTURE OF LEGALISED IMPUNITY: A DOCTRINAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CRITIQUE OF INDIA’S MARITAL RAPE EXCEPTION, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (2) OF 2026, PG. 305-314, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.
ABSTRACT
This research paper undertakes an exhaustive doctrinal and constitutional critique of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to expose the stark dissonance between the jurisprudence of vitiated consent under Section 90 and the Marital Rape Exception (MRE) under Exception 2 to Section 375. The analysis reveals a legal paradox where the consent of unmarried women is rigorously protected against deceit and misconception of fact, while the consent of married women is legally negated, subjecting them to a presumption of passive and perpetual consent. Through a constitutional lens, the paper demonstrates that the MRE violates the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21. It establishes an arbitrary classification devoid of a rational nexus, stripping married women of their rights to bodily integrity, dignity, and decisional autonomy.
Furthermore, the study critically evaluates the State’s reliance on allied laws, namely Section 498A (Cruelty) and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDVA), as sufficient alternative remedies. It argues that these provisions are doctrinally mismatched, conflating distinct offenses, imposing higher evidentiary thresholds for “grave injury,” and reducing heinous sexual violations to civil disputes or lesser crimes. To address the purported evidentiary difficulties in prosecuting marital rape, the research introduces a novel interdisciplinary framework integrating forensic psychology. By applying perpetrator typologies (such as Groth and Finkelhor), Battered Woman Syndrome (BWS), and the concept of “Coercive Control,” the paper suggests actionable evidentiary pathways to objectively establish context and non-consent. Ultimately, the paper concludes that retaining the MRE prioritizes patriarchal family structures over individual rights, advocating for the unequivocal criminalization of marital rape.
Keywords:
- Marital Rape Exception
- Vitiated Consent
- Bodily Integrity
- Indian Penal Code (IPC)
- Forensic Psychology