 INTENT OF THE LEGISLATURE:

The purpose of the legislatures to frame Section 497 was to preserve the sanctity of the marriage.
Apex court emphasised over this intention to hold Section 497 as NOT a criminal offence. The
court came up with the rationale that if it stays to be a criminal offence, the state being the
prosecutor would interfere in the private realm of the marriage. SC held "If it is treated as a
crime, there would be immense intrusion into the extreme privacy of the matrimonial sphere".
Such interference can disrupt the peace of the marriage which won’t be able to preserve the
sanctity of marriage. And if a party wishes to end the sacred tie of marriage, such party can
anyway do it with their discretion by filling for divorce as it is already a civil offence. This is
giving more autonomy to the parties and can even continue with the marital relationship if they
wish to. 
 RULE OF HARMONIOUS CONSTRUCTION:
Article 21 which is Right to Life also contains the aspect of dignity under its ambit. Same aspect
was questioned in the present judgement. Section 497 talks about the connivance of the husband
for the sexual intercourse of wife with the third person and if such connivance is present, it would
not amount to Adultery. The apex court has held that such connivance right of the husband
corresponds with proprietary right of the women and further treats women like a property or a
chattel. This questions the dignity of the women which is covered under Article 21 of the
Constitution and does violate it not in favour of women.  As it violates Article 21, Court has
applied the rule of harmonious construction to decriminalize Section 497 as it is not in line with
Article 21