India is among the decreasing numbers of countries where there exists an exemption to husbands from criminal liability for committing sexual assault against their spouses. Section 375 of the IPC, which is currently reiterated without any changes in BNS, 2023 through Exception 2, makes it clear that sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own wife, provided that the wife does not constitute a minor under the age of eighteen years, is not rape. In this paper, I am going to analyze how this exception has been developed from its origin, its continuity in legislation, its legal interpretation, and its social justification, arguing that this exception continues to exist as a result of legal negligence but rather a purposeful achievement through patriarchal legal inertia, an inconsistent conservative court, and social customs regarding marital relations. Using feminist legal theory perspective and comparing laws from the United Kingdom, South Africa, and Nepal, this paper examines how the exemption began as an English Common Law provision, was incorporated via the British colonial administration into the IPC in 1860, survived multiple reforms after Indian independence, and faced its ultimate judicial challenge in the 2022 split decision from the Delhi High Court. The paper further evaluates the psychological, constitutional, and socio-economic costs imposed on survivors by legal non-recognition of marital rape, while recommending deletion of Exception 2 under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and advocating reform grounded in Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution to secure bodily autonomy, dignity, and equal protection within marriage.