The concept of dignity forms the very foundation to the Constitution and the rights enshrined in it [Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, (1973) 4 SCC 225].

_____

Statutes are considered to be ‘always speaking’ [Dharni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd. v. Union of India, (2019) 5 SCC 480]. Court’s power to purposively interpret a statutory text does not imply, a Judge can substitute legislative intent with their own individual notions. But, law should be interpreted in terms of changing needs of times and circumstances [Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse,  (2014) 1 SCC 188].

_____

The institution of marriage does not influence the answer to the question of whether a woman has consented to sexual relations.

Since challenge to Exception 2 to Section 375, IPC is pending consideration, we would leave constitutional validity of Exception 2 to Section 375, IPC to be decided.  

Notwithstanding same, meaning of ‘sexual assault’ or ‘rape’ in Rule 3B(a) of The Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003 includes a husband’s act of sexual assault or rape committed on his wife. In order to avail benefit of Rule 3B(a), women need not necessarily seek recourse to formal legal proceedings to prove factum of “sexual assault, rape or incest”.

– Hon’ble Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, X v. Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, [Civil Appeal No 5802 of 2022].

_____

Three-Judge Bench in Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Admn., (2009) 9 SCC 1 has held, right to make reproductive choices is a facet of Article 21. Further, consent of a pregnant person in matters of reproductive choices and abortion is paramount. Court’s decision in Suchita Srivastava was to protect right to abortion on a firm footing as an intrinsic element of fundamental rights to privacy, dignity and bodily integrity. Court held that no entity, even if it is State, can speak on behalf of a pregnant person and usurp her consent. A choice to continue pregnancy to term, regardless of Court having allowed termination of pregnancy, belongs to a pregnant person alone.

– Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, Hon’ble Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, Mother of X v. State of Maharashtra, [Civil Appeal No. 5194 of 2024] decided on 29.04.2024.