New Delhi Jan 28 PTI The Delhi High Court Friday asked the Centre to inform whether it wishes to withdraw its 2017 affidavit in which it had submitted that marital rape cannot be made a criminal offence as it could become a phenomenon which may destabilise the institution of marriage and an easy tool for harassing husbandsA bench of Justices Rajiv Shakdher and C Hari Shankar which has been conducting marathon hearings on a batch of petitions seeking criminalisation of marital rape asked Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma to take instructions on this aspect and listed the matter for January 31The courts direction came after advocate Karuna Nundy representing petitioner NGOs RIT Foundation and All India Democratic Womens Association sought a clarification as to whether she shall address on the written submissions and affidavits filed by the central government so far or they are withdrawing itTo this Justice Shakdher said Mr Sharma take instructions on that as well What do you want Monday This assumes significance as the Centre in its affidavit filed in August 2017 had said the Supreme Court and various High Courts have already observed the rising misuse of Section 498A harassment caused to a married woman by her husband and in-laws of Indian Penal Code IPCIt had further said that marital rape has not been defined in an statue or law and while the offence of rape is defined under section 375 IPC defining marital rape would call for a broad based consensus of the societyHowever in January Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the high court that it was considering a constructive approach to the issue and has sought suggestions from several stakeholders and authorities on comprehensive amendments to the criminal law He had said criminalisation of marital rape involves family issues as well as the dignity of a woman and cannot be looked at from a microscopic angle and sought some time to respond with the governments standThe bench on January 24 granted 10 days to the Centre to come back with its stand on the issueThe court which has been hearing the pleas on a daily basis since January 10 has concluded hearing the submissions of petitioners Delhi government and some NGOs which have been opposing the pleasOn Friday Sharma submitted that the petitioners should advance their rejoinder arguments after the Centre places its arguments before the courtHowever the bench said that either the central government shall start its submissions from January 31 or it would hear the rejoinder arguments of petitionersYou are not starting so we will hear them What to do now If you do not start we will hear them Without you it is not going anywhere At least we will hear Karuna Nundy and Colin Gonsalves counsel for petitioners the bench saidSharma responded by saying there was no unseemly hurry in the matter and the court has already granted time to the CentreTo this Justice Shakdher shot back Please dont say that We have taken out our judicial time on this so dont say this and dont enter on side issues Let us have a dialogue on more substantial things which is the law Take a week after they have finished but at least start You can come back on that the bench saidDuring the hearing NGO Men Welfare Trust MWT which is opposing the batch of petitions seeking criminalisation of marital rape submitted that the Domestic Violence Act was specifically promulgated for recognizing spouse sexual violenceAdvocate Sai Deepak J representing the NGO submitted that the immunity provided is to protect the civil liberties of the husband thanks to the nature of the relationshipHe also clarified that the entity which he represents is not against recognition of spousal sexual violence and claimed that some of the news reports have slightly misconstrued his submissionsOn this the bench said by the time we finish we will also face flak Nundy also submitted that she has received rape threats but she has not talked about itMWTs counsel had earlier argued that sexual intercourse between a husband and wife cannot be treated at par with that in non-marital relationships as the issue of consent cannot be divorced from the context of a marriageThe bench was hearing PILs filed by NGOs RIT Foundation All India Democratic Womens Association a man and a woman seeking striking down of the exception granted to husbands under the Indian rape lawUnder the exception given in Section 375 of the IPC sexual intercourse or sexual acts by a man with his own wife the wife not being under fifteen years of age is not rapeThe petitioners had said that marital rape was the biggest form of sexual violence against women and the Delhi government had said that this act was already covered as a crime of cruelty under IPCThe petitioner NGO has challenged the Constitutionality of section 375 IPC on the ground that it discriminated against married women being sexually assaulted by their husbands PTI SKV SA