Volume III Issue II

THE LEGAL STATUS OF MARITAL RAPE IN INDIA: AN EXAMINATION OF EVOLVING JURISPRUDENCE Vaishnavi Singh, 10th semester Student of BA.LLB(H) at Amity Law School, Amity University, Lucknow, India. Adarsh Singh, Assistant Professor at Amity university Lucknow Campus. Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.40 The exception under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which exempts a husband from being prosecuted for rape committed against his wife, remains one of the most archaic and controversial immunities in Indian criminal law. This paper investigates the legal status of marital rape in India through the lens of constitutional principles, judicial reasoning, and comparative legal frameworks. It explores the intersection of privacy, dignity, and bodily autonomy within marriage and evaluates the inconsistency of the exception with Article 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The study analyses evolving jurisprudence in India, including pending petitions before the Delhi High Court and the constitutional challenges mounted by civil society and survivors. The research juxtaposes Indian laws with international standards under the “Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)”, to which India is a signatory, and with legal reforms in countries like the UK, Canada, and South Africa where marital rape has been criminalized. Judicial reluctance to read down Exception 2 is critiqued, and the discourse around spousal immunity is deconstructed using feminist legal theory and the doctrine of substantive equality. The paper argues that criminalization of marital rape is not only a legal necessity but also a moral and constitutional imperative. This work also examines the role of the judiciary in fostering transformative constitutionalism, and how public interest litigations have shaped the conversation. It proposes concrete legal reforms through statutory amendments and judicial interventions that align with evolving societal values, gender justice, and constitutional morality. The analysis rests on a wide array of case laws, Law Commission Reports, parliamentary debates, and comparative foreign precedents, highlighting the urgent need for reform in India’s approach to sexual autonomy within marriage.

A CRITICAL STUDY OF INDIA’S RESERVATION POLICY WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON THE CREAMY LAYER PRINCIPLE Shreya Tiwari, 10th semester Student of BA.LLB(H) at Amity Law School, Amity University, Lucknow, India. Dr. Parishkar Shresth, Assistant Professor at Amity university Lucknow Campus. Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.39 This research paper examines India’s constitutional policy of reservations with a special focus on the creamy layer principle. It analyses the doctrinal evolution of the principle from Indra Sawhney v. Union of India and traces how the judiciary used it to exclude the socially and economically advanced among backward classes. The study identifies that while the doctrine aims to balance equity and merit, its application has remained inconsistent. The absence of statutory codification and lack of centralised data undermine its effectiveness. The exclusion relies heavily on income and occupational thresholds, failing to account for social capital, inherited privilege, and intersectional disadvantages. The research also evaluates key judgments including Jarnail Singh, which extended creamy layer exclusion to SC/STs in promotions, and Janhit Abhiyan, where EWS reservation bypassed the doctrine altogether. The study critiques the lack of uniform policy across states and the inefficiencies in periodic revision of income limits. Comparisons with affirmative action models in the US, South Africa, Brazil, and Malaysia highlight India’s unique position in adopting intra-group exclusion as a legal filter. The paper argues that unless legislative reforms are undertaken, the creamy layer principle risks becoming a bureaucratic rule without meaningful constitutional impact. It recommends a data-driven, socially sensitive, and uniformly applicable model. A revised creamy layer framework must include non-economic indicators, gender justice elements, and sunset clauses to ensure equitable circulation of benefits. The study concludes that effective implementation of the creamy layer rule can restore public trust and make affirmative action truly inclusive.