This established that once married, a woman does not have the right to refuse sex with her husband.
Due to construction of sex as a woman's duty within a marriage, there is always a presumption of her consent.
Despite amendments, law commissions and new legislations, one of the most humiliating and debilitating acts is still not an offence in India.
A look at the options a woman has to protect herself in a marriage, tells us that the legislations have been either non-existent or obscure and everything just depends on the court's interpretation.
Any form of forceful sexual intercourse violates the right of privacy.
It can also include activities which do not involve direct touching.The basic argument which is advanced in favour of these so-called 'laws' is that consent to marry in itself encompasses a consent to engage into sexual activity.But, an implied consent to engage into sexual activity does not mean consent to being inflicted with sexual violence.Sir Matthew Hale, Chief Justice in 17th Century England, said, "the husband cannot be guilty of rape committed by himself upon his lawful wife, for by their mutual consent and contract, the wife hath given up herself this kind unto her husband which she cannot retract."He asserted that, upon marriage, the wife automatically hands over her legal person to the husband and consents to all sexual acts, which cannot be retracted at any later date for no reason whatsoever.He introduced within the marriage, a notion of 'implied consent' that started at the time of the marriage and continued for the entire course of the marriage, and such consent was deemed irrevocable by Lord Hale.