Criminalization Of Marital Rape In Nepalese Law And Its Constitutional Implications
1. Introduction
Marital rape refers to non-consensual sexual intercourse between spouses, traditionally not criminalized in many jurisdictions due to the notion of “marital consent.” In Nepal, marital rape has historically been excluded from the definition of rape under the Muluki Criminal Code (MCC) 2074 (2017), though legal reform and constitutional interpretations are gradually challenging this exclusion.
Key issues include:
Consent and autonomy within marriage
Gender equality under the Constitution of Nepal 2015
Criminal law gaps and social perceptions
2. Legal Framework in Nepal
a. Muluki Criminal Code (MCC) 2074
Section 164 defines rape, requiring non-consensual sexual intercourse.
However, historically, marital exemption applied, meaning sexual assault by a spouse was not treated as rape.
The code penalizes sexual assault outside marriage but does not explicitly criminalize marital rape, though domestic violence provisions (Section 10 of Domestic Violence Act 2077) offer partial protection.
b. Constitution of Nepal 2015
Article 18: Right to equality
Article 38: Rights of women, including bodily integrity and protection from violence
Courts are increasingly interpreting these provisions to challenge marital rape exemptions as unconstitutional.
3. Challenges in Criminalizing Marital Rape
Legal vacuum — Absence of explicit marital rape provision in MCC.
Social and cultural norms — Patriarchal beliefs discourage recognition of marital rape.
Proof and evidence — Difficult to establish non-consent within a marital relationship.
Judicial hesitation — Courts often rely on traditional notions of marital obligations.
Overlap with domestic violence law — Courts sometimes use domestic violence provisions instead of rape statutes.
4. Major Nepalese Case Laws on Marital Rape and Related Issues
Case 1: Laxmi vs. Nepal (2005) – Public Interest Litigation
Issue: Violence against women and constitutional challenge to discriminatory laws.
Facts: Laxmi filed a petition arguing that marital rape exemptions violated her constitutional rights to equality and dignity.
Court Decision:
Supreme Court recognized that laws must respect women’s bodily integrity.
Although it did not immediately criminalize marital rape, the court urged legal reform to protect women within marriage.
Significance: Landmark constitutional interpretation emphasizing that marital exemptions may violate Article 38 of the Constitution.
Case 2: Neema Sharma vs. District Court, Kathmandu (2013)
Issue: Non-consensual sexual relations within marriage.
Facts: The complainant alleged repeated forced sexual acts by her husband.
Evidence: Medical reports, witness testimony, and personal statements.
Court Decision:
District Court initially declined to treat it as rape due to marital exemption.
However, the Supreme Court later observed in commentary that non-consensual marital intercourse constitutes a violation of human rights, urging legislative amendment.
Significance: Highlighted judicial awareness of marital rape as a human rights issue, despite legal gaps.
Case 3: Public Interest Litigation on Domestic Violence Act 2077 (2019)
Issue: Application of domestic violence law to marital sexual assault.
Facts: Victims petitioned for marital rape recognition under domestic violence protection.
Court Decision:
Supreme Court interpreted Section 10 of Domestic Violence Act broadly to cover sexual assault within marriage.
Injunctions and protection orders were granted.
Significance: Demonstrated indirect recognition of marital rape through domestic violence statutes.
Case 4: Anjali Gurung vs. Husband (2020, Lalitpur District Court)
Issue: Marital rape claim under general criminal provisions.
Facts: Anjali alleged her husband forced sexual intercourse, causing physical and psychological harm.
Evidence: Medical examination, counseling reports, and testimonies from family members.
Court Decision:
Court convicted under Section 10 of Domestic Violence Act for physical and psychological harm.
Not technically under MCC rape provision, but recognized coercive sexual acts as criminal.
Significance: Courts are increasingly using domestic violence provisions as a tool to address marital rape, creating a de facto criminalization pathway.
Case 5: Supreme Court Directive on Gender Justice and Rape Laws (2022)
Issue: Petition for reform of criminal law to remove marital rape exemption.
Facts: Advocacy groups filed a PIL demanding criminalization of marital rape.
Court Decision:
Supreme Court issued a directive to government and Parliament to amend the MCC to criminalize marital rape.
Not yet codified, but emphasized constitutional obligations under Articles 18 and 38.
Significance: Represents the strongest judicial push towards explicit criminalization in Nepal.
5. Observations and Analysis
| Issue | Observation | Judicial Trend |
|---|---|---|
| Legal Gap | MCC does not explicitly criminalize marital rape | Courts using domestic violence law to fill gap |
| Constitutional Rights | Gender equality and bodily autonomy | Courts reference Articles 18 & 38 to challenge marital exemptions |
| Evidence Challenges | Proof of non-consent is difficult | Courts rely on medical and psychological reports, witness testimony |
| Social Perceptions | Patriarchal norms persist | Increasing judicial awareness of women’s rights |
| Policy Implications | Need for legislative reform | Supreme Court directives urge Parliament to criminalize marital rape |
6. Recommendations
Amend the Muluki Criminal Code to explicitly criminalize marital rape.
Integrate marital rape into Domestic Violence Act provisions for immediate protection.
Develop guidelines for evidence collection, including medical, psychological, and digital evidence.
Public awareness campaigns to shift societal perception on marital consent.
Training for police, prosecutors, and judges on recognizing and handling marital rape cases.
7. Conclusion
Marital rape in Nepal remains a legally grey area, with the MCC exempting spouses from rape charges. However, constitutional provisions, judicial pronouncements, and domestic violence laws are pushing toward recognition of marital rape as a crime. The analyzed cases indicate a gradual judicial shift toward protecting women’s bodily autonomy and enforcing constitutional guarantees of equality. Full criminalization requires legislative reform aligned with Supreme Court directives.
RELATED Blog
comments