There is a chasm that separates sanctity from sanctimoniousness. Unfortunately, it appears that the powers that be are seldom aware of the difference: in fact, they often conflate the two willingly. A recent example of this problematic conflation is the draft report prepared by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on home affairs which, in its review of the bills that are set to replace the Indian Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure, proposed the recriminalisation of adultery, this time along gender-neutral lines. The rationale that has been cited for this regressive step is, ostensibly, the protection of the sanctity of marriage. If the suggestion does make its way to the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, it will be one more instance of conservative policy wonks weaponising self-righteousness to push through a primitive idea. In fact, there is a case for the wise men to take a closer look and learn from the historic judgment passed by the Supreme Court that decriminalised adultery in 2018. The highest court’s reasoning was enlightening. It struck down the criminalisation of adultery by acknowledging the autonomous agency of women: that a man can be punished for having sexual ties with a married woman because her ownership rests squarely with her husband is an idea that is archaic, even colonial. Besides, the yoking of a woman’s agency — moral and sexual — to her marital status is a blow to the notions of both individual liberty and privacy. The ruling was also an acknowledgement — but not an endorsement — of changing ground realities: human relationships are often complex engagements and the black and white reading of morality is not enough to capture the shades of grey in such bonds.

The moral temperament of a society can often be gauged from the ability of its laws to move with the times. The attempt to recriminalise adultery, if it does come to pass, would be suggestive of New India’s retrograde moral compass. What is curious is the willingness of the State to sacrifice progressive ideals — be it the decriminalisation of adultery or the according of marital status for sexual minorities — at the altar of marriage. Perhaps it would be better to expend energy and wisdom to fix some of the inherent flaws of the marital institution. Iniquitous division of labour, invisibility of domestic chores, legal non-recognition of marital rape are some aspects that make marriage a traumatic experience for women. Why not deliberate on these to ‘protect’ marriages from disintegration?