“We have grave doubts about the expediency of transplanting western experience in our country. Social conditions are different and so also the general intellectual level.”
– Sikri CJI, Palekar, Dua, Beg and Ray JJ, Jagmohan Singh v. State of U.P., (1973) 1 SCC 20.
This spelled disaster in Koushal, (2014) 1 SCC 1. The grave doubts shall return to haunt the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
1960s, High Court of Gujarat [AIR 1968 GUJ 252]: “orifice of the mouth is not, according to nature, meant for sexual or carnal intercourse.”
Hon’ble Judges G.S. Singhvi and S.J. Mukhopadhaya have had stints at High Court of Gujarat.
The Koushal Bench was ‘apprehensive’ of how the Court would rule in a case of proved consensual intercourse between adults and ultimately looked to the Parliament for guidance. The Parliament had not thought it proper to delete the provision.
Cannot a law abiding woman give herself up to a police, stating that her eagerness for obedience of the law was eclipsed once or twice upon a time by her desire for sexual intercourse of an unfriendly nature?
That would work better than the Present Curatives, Real Sedatives.