
SC examines marital rape, says marriage does not mean loss of individual autonomy
SC examines marital rape, says marriage does not mean loss of individual autonomy

SC examines marital rape, says marriage does not mean loss of individual autonomy
















Marriage can't disqualify women from compassionate jobs: Chhattisgarh HC



On 14 July 2026, a Magistrate at Kalyan, Maharashtra granted bail to a sitting corporator, accused of assaulting three doctors on duty at a municipal hospital, on a bond of Rs. 50,000 subject to four routine bail conditions. Three days later, three of his co-accused were also released on parity. On 18 July 2026, a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court, acting on its own motion, stayed both orders and directed the corporator to surrender. The remaining three accused had not yet been released. Among the reasons cited by the High Court was the absence of any condition enabling the investigating agency to monitor the accused's presence or secure his co-operation with the investigation. On 7 August 2026, the same Bench of the Bombay High Court granted bail to all four accused. But what had previously been a release on routine terms was replaced by a comprehensive set of bail conditions. The accused were required to reside outside Maharashtra until the trial commenced, to live only at addresses specified in the order, to remain continuously reachable on designated telephone numbers, to report to the police three days a week, to surrender their passports, and to keep away from the victims and witnesses. The corporator had eighteen prior crimes registered against him. The victims were doctors assaulted in a civic hospital, one of whom had resigned out of fear. These were circumstances from which a court might reasonably have concluded that continued custody was necessary. It did not do so. Instead, the High Court chose a different course: release subject to conditions. What are bail conditions for, and how far may they go? Bail is the rule and conditions are how it works An undertrial is presumed innocent, his guilt being yet to be established, and pre-trial detention is therefore not punishment for the offence alleged but a measure justified only by what the trial requires. Once the investigation is complete and the chargesheet filed, custody can no longer be justified b