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Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court has firmly stated that it is time for husbands to discard outdated Victorian-era mentalities and acknowledge that a wife’s body, privacy, and rights belong solely to her and are not subject to her husband’s control or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.
Karnataka govt directs municipal corps to regulate, prohibit pigeon feeding
Bengaluru (PTI): The Karnataka government has issued directions to municipal corporations across the state to regulate and prohibit feeding pigeons in public places, citing serious public health concerns.
Deputy Secretary to Government V Lakshmikanth has written to the Urban Development Department requesting it to issue directions to the Greater Bengaluru Authority (GBA) and all municipal corporations to take immediate steps to implement the measures.
In an official note dated December 16 issued by the Health and Family Welfare Department and released to the media on Wednesday, the department said uncontrolled feeding of pigeons in public places has resulted in large congregations of birds, excessive droppings and serious health concerns, particularly respiratory illnesses linked to prolonged exposure to pigeon droppings and feathers such as hypersensitivity pneumonitis and other lung diseases.
ALSO READ: Chinese GPS tracker found on seagull near Karwar Coast
"The commissioner, the Greater Bengaluru Authority and the Commissioners and chief officers of other municipal corporations shall take necessary action to mitigate the causes of dangerous disease spread by pigeon and enforce specified guidelines in their respective jurisdiction," the note said.
According to the department, these include a prohibition on feeding pigeons or causing pigeons to be fed in areas where it may cause nuisance or pose a health hazard to the public. Pigeon feeding shall be permitted only in designated areas in a controlled manner, subject to certain conditions.
"The designated areas may be selected in consultation with stakeholders. The responsibility for upkeep of the designated areas and compliance to the directions shall be taken up by some charitable organisation or an NGO. The feeding in designated areas shall be permitted only for some limited hours in the day," it said.
The note further stated that authorised officers of local authorities shall issue on-the-spot warnings and may impose fines for violation of the order, or lodge complaints to prosecute offenders under Sections 271 (Negligent act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life) and 272 (Malignant act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
It also directed local authorities to conduct public awareness campaigns, including the display of signboards, banners and digital messages, explaining the health hazards associated with pigeon droppings and feathers, the content of the regulatory directions and penalties for violations, and alternative humane methods of bird conservation that do not endanger public health.
