<p>The Karnataka government has supported before the Supreme Court the March 23 judgement of the High Court which had declined to quash the charges of rape framed under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against a man accused of raping his wife, despite the exception to the husband. </p>.<p>The state filed its written response to the top court's notice on a plea by the man challenging the High Court's judgement. </p>.<p>"Charge framed against the husband for alleged offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC for alleged rape of his wife, in the peculiar facts of this case, does not warrant any interference. It is a matter of trial," the state government said.</p>.<p>In its reply filed last month, the state government said, "The entire issue springs from the complaint registered by the wife alleging commission of brutal sexual act by the husband against her, as also against child from bare reading of the complaint the brutal act of the Petitioner against the Complainant and her child has been narrated. The Investigating Officer after the investigation, have filed the charge sheet for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 376, 354, 506 of IPC and Section 5(m)(1) of the POCSO Act."</p>.<p>The Karnataka High Court had in its judgement had held that a brutal act of sexual assault against a woman, albeit by her husband, cannot but be termed as rape.</p>.<p>It had also said the Exception granted to husband under Section 375 of the IPC cannot be absolute. </p>.<p>Earlier, the Delhi High Court had on May 11 given a split verdict with regard to exception for husbands for sexual assault under the penal law and the matter is pending before the top court.</p>.<p>The Union government, which had maintained the matter is essentially a legislative function, said it has written to States and Union Territories and is yet to receive their responses. </p>.<p>In 2017, the Supreme Court had read down an exception to Section 375 only to the extent of criminalising rape with a minor wife but clarified at the same time that it has not expressed any view on the issue of marital rape. </p>.<p>However, the Justice J S Verma committee, formed after 2012 Delhi gang rape case, had in 2013 recommended the criminalisation of marital rape, since the state of being married does not generate automatic consent to sexual acts.</p>
<p>The Karnataka government has supported before the Supreme Court the March 23 judgement of the High Court which had declined to quash the charges of rape framed under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against a man accused of raping his wife, despite the exception to the husband. </p>.<p>The state filed its written response to the top court's notice on a plea by the man challenging the High Court's judgement. </p>.<p>"Charge framed against the husband for alleged offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC for alleged rape of his wife, in the peculiar facts of this case, does not warrant any interference. It is a matter of trial," the state government said.</p>.<p>In its reply filed last month, the state government said, "The entire issue springs from the complaint registered by the wife alleging commission of brutal sexual act by the husband against her, as also against child from bare reading of the complaint the brutal act of the Petitioner against the Complainant and her child has been narrated. The Investigating Officer after the investigation, have filed the charge sheet for the offences punishable under Section 498A, 376, 354, 506 of IPC and Section 5(m)(1) of the POCSO Act."</p>.<p>The Karnataka High Court had in its judgement had held that a brutal act of sexual assault against a woman, albeit by her husband, cannot but be termed as rape.</p>.<p>It had also said the Exception granted to husband under Section 375 of the IPC cannot be absolute. </p>.<p>Earlier, the Delhi High Court had on May 11 given a split verdict with regard to exception for husbands for sexual assault under the penal law and the matter is pending before the top court.</p>.<p>The Union government, which had maintained the matter is essentially a legislative function, said it has written to States and Union Territories and is yet to receive their responses. </p>.<p>In 2017, the Supreme Court had read down an exception to Section 375 only to the extent of criminalising rape with a minor wife but clarified at the same time that it has not expressed any view on the issue of marital rape. </p>.<p>However, the Justice J S Verma committee, formed after 2012 Delhi gang rape case, had in 2013 recommended the criminalisation of marital rape, since the state of being married does not generate automatic consent to sexual acts.</p>
