Marriage does not grant husbands control over wives' autonomy, privacy: Allahabad High Court
Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court has firmly stated that it is time for husbands to discard outdated Victorian-era mentalities and acknowledge that a wife’s body, privacy, and rights belong solely to her and are not subject to her husband’s control or ownership.
A single-judge bench of Justice Vinod Diwakar made these observations while dismissing a plea filed by a man accused of secretly recording intimate videos of his wife without her consent, uploading them on Facebook, and sharing the footage with her cousin.
The petitioner sought to quash the chargesheet and criminal proceedings under s. 67B of the Information Technology Act, arguing that no offence could be made out as the complainant was his legally wedded wife. He also contended that the FIR was anti-timed, the victim's statement under s. 161 CrPC showed substantial improvements, and no material evidence linked him to the alleged acts.
Opposing the plea, the Additional Government Advocate argued that serious allegations were made against the husband. The complainant's legal relationship with the accused did not give him the right to make or circulate an obscene video.
Rejecting the husband’s arguments, the Court observed that such claims could be raised during trial but cannot be grounds for quashing proceedings under s. 482 CrPC. Addressing the core issue, the Court remarked:
“Marriage does not grant a husband ownership or control over his wife, nor does it dilute her autonomy or right to privacy. By uploading an intimate video on Facebook, the applicant has gravely breached the sanctity of the marital relationship.”
Referring to historical principles like the Victorian doctrine of coverture, the Court stated that it is high time for husbands to move past regressive mindsets that undermine women’s autonomy. It emphasised the constitutional right to privacy, citing landmark cases such as Roe v. Wade (US) and K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (India), which recognise bodily autonomy and personal liberty as fundamental rights.
The Court further underscored that a wife is an individual with her own rights and agency, not an extension of her husband. Respecting her bodily autonomy and privacy is not only a legal duty but also a moral obligation essential for fostering an equal relationship.
Dismissing the plea, the Court highlighted that any attempts to control or violate a wife’s rights through coercion, abuse, or the non-consensual sharing of intimate details constitute severe breaches of trust and legality.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
If Bumrah is not fit then a score of around 200 also might not be enough: Gavaskar
Sydney, Jan 4: Batting great Sunil Gavaskar feels India will struggle to defend even 200 in case premier pacer Jasprit Bumrah is unable to bowl at full throttle on the third day of the fifth and final Test against Australia here on Sunday.
Bumrah had left the field for scans during the second day's post-lunch session after bowling just one over, having experienced some discomfort. However, he returned to the dressing room after undergoing precautionary scans for an unspecified niggle.
India pacer Prasidh Krishna said his skipper had suffered back spasm.
The medical team was monitoring him as India ended the day 145 runs in front with four second innings wickets left on a SCG track which is aiding the bowlers.
"Look, if India scores 40 more runs or they put 185 on the board then they have a great chance but it all depends on Jasprit Bumrah's fitness. If Jasprit Bumrah is fit then 145-150 might be enough. But if Bumrah is not fit then a score of around 200 also might not be enough," said Gavaskar on Star Sports on Saturday.
Gavaskar also said maintaining secrecy around Bumrah's status is not going to help the Australians, who have so far struggled to counter the threat posed by the Indian pace spearhead.
"One thing that I liked was when he came back after the scan, obviously it took a lot of time because the hospital is a bit far, but he looked in good shape and his body language was such that there was no indication of the Australian team and it is very important to maintain the secrecy.
"Because, tactically you do not want to announce whether Bumrah will be available for bowling or not, and even if he is not available and this news goes across the opposition dressing room because till now Australian batsmen haven't found out a way to counter him, they don’t know whether they should attack, defend, or whether they should play on front-foot.
"So to execute this plan it is important to maintain secrecy, so Bumrah and the Indian team management managed it quite well," Gavaskar said.
The pacer has already taken 32 wickets in the series, and had figures of 2/33 in 10 overs before leaving the field, having removed Marnus Labuschagne in the morning session and Usman Khawaja on the last ball of the first evening.
