Marriage Doesn't Give A Husband Ownership Or Control Over Wife: HC On Intimate Video
A case was filed against one Pradumn Yadav under section 67 of the IT Act in Mirzapur district by his wife alleging that Yadav, without her knowledge and consent, made an obscene video of them.
The Allahabad High Court has refused to quash a criminal case against a man accused of uploading an intimate video of himself and his wife on Facebook, observing that marriage does not grant a husband ownership or control over his wife, nor does it dilute her autonomy or right to privacy.
Dismissing an application filed for quashing the charge sheet, Justice Vinod Diwakar observed, "By uploading an intimate video on Facebook, the applicant (husband) has gravely breached the sanctity of the marital relationship. A husband is expected to honour the trust, faith, and confidence reposed in him by his wife, particularly in the context of their intimate relationship."
"The act of sharing such content amounts to a violation of the inherent confidentiality that defines the bond between husband and wife. This breach of trust undermines the very foundation of the marital relationship and is not protected by the marital bond," the court added.
The court further said, "A wife is not an extension of her husband but an individual with her own rights, desires, and agency. Respecting her bodily autonomy and privacy is not just a legal obligation but a moral imperative in fostering a truly equal relationship." A case was filed against one Pradumn Yadav under section 67 of the IT Act in Mirzapur district by his wife alleging that Yadav, without her knowledge and consent, made an obscene video of an intimate act performed between them from his mobile, firstly uploaded on Facebook and thereafter shared with the cousin of his wife and other co-villagers.
Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is the legally wedded husband of the complainant and, therefore, no offence under Section 67 of the IT Act has been made out qua applicant. There are fair chances of compromise between the husband and wife.
However, the Additional Government Advocate opposed the argument on the grounds that even though the complainant is the legally wedded wife of the applicant, the applicant has no right to make an obscene video of her and circulate it to the cousin and other co-villagers.
(This report has been published as part of an auto-generated syndicate wire feed. Apart from the headline, no editing has been done in the copy by ABP Live.)
Top Headlines
