Page:Joseph Shine vs Union of India (Adultery Judgement).pdf/5

 perceived, the spheres in which the legislature has responded and the rights that have been accentuated by the constitutional courts. To explicate, despite conferring many a right on women within the parameters of progressive jurisprudence and expansive constitutional vision, the Court cannot conceive of women still being treated as a property of men, and secondly, where the delicate relationship between a husband and wife does not remain so, it is seemingly implausible to allow a criminal offence to enter and make a third party culpable.

4.We may presently state the nature of the lis.

5.The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India challenging the validity of Section 497 IPC. A three-Judge Bench, on the first occasion, taking note of the authorities in Yusuf Abdul Aziz v. State of Bombay, Sowmithri Vishnu v. Union of India and another , V. Revathi v. Union of India and others and W. Kalyani v. State through Inspector of Police and another and appreciating the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, felt the necessity to have a re-look at the