Rape is a heinous crime and once it is established against a person charged of the offence, justice must be done to the victim of crime by awarding suitable punishment to the crime doer. We are constrained to observe that criminal justice system is not working in our country as it should. The police reforms have not taken place despite directions of this Court in the case of Prakash Singh and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., (2006) 8 SCC 1. We do not intend to say anything more in this regard since matter is being dealt with separately by a 3-Judge Bench. The investigators hardly have professional orientation; they do not have modern tools. On many occasions impartial investigation suffers because of political interference. The criminal trials are protracted because of non-appearance of official witnesses on time and the non-availability of the facilities for recording evidence by video conferencing. The public prosecutors have their limitations; the defence lawyers do not make themselves available and the court would be routinely informed about their pre-occupation with other matters; the courts remain over-burdened with the briefs listed on the day and they do not have adequate infrastructure. The adjournments thus become routine; the casualty is justice. It is imperative that the criminal cases relating to offences against the State, corruption, dowry death, domestic violence, sexual assault, financial fraud and cyber crimes are fast-tracked and decided in a fixed time frame, preferably, of three years including the appeal provisions. It is high time that immediate and urgent steps are taken in amending the procedural and other laws to achieve the above objectives. We must remember that a strong and efficient criminal justice system is a guarantee to the rule of law and vibrant civil society.
- Rape can be heterosexual or homosexual
- The victims can be either a man or a woman.
- Rape is not a continuous offence.
- Each act of intercourse amounts to a distinct crime.
- The victim can be abused by force, coercion, or deception.
- the prosecutrix cannot be compelled to submit to a medical examination
- The marital status and children of the accused is irrelevant to the case of rape
- In a prosecution for rape, the birth of a child is conclusively a prior act of unlawful intercourse
- The character of the prosecutrix is not a defense.
- Impotency can be considered a good defense in a criminal prosecution for rape.
- Subsequent marriage of the offender to the victim is not a defense .
- To make a victim go through psychiatric examination an accused should provide a compelling reason
- No Rape At all
- It was a Consensual sex
- A false allegation of rape can cause distress, humiliation and damage to the accused - It is also by now well settled that the courts must, while evaluating evidence, remain alive to the fact that in a case of rape, no self-respecting woman would come forward in a court just to make a humiliating statement against her honour such as is involved in the commission of rape on her. In cases involving sexual molestation, supposed […]
- Atif Zareef and others vs The State – 04/01/2021 - RAPE CASE-Modern forensic science shows that the two finger test must not be conducted for establishing rape-sexual violence, and the size of the vaginal introitus has no bearing on a case of sexual violence. The status of hymen is also irrelevant because hymen can be torn due to several reasons such as cycling, riding among other things. An intact hymen does not rule out sexual violence and a torn hymen does not prove previous sexual intercourse. Hymen must therefore be treated like any other part of the genitals while documenting examination findings in cases of sexual violence. Only those findings that are relevant to the episode of sexual assault, i.e., findings such as fresh tears, bleeding, oedema, etc., are to be documented.
- Chaitu Lal Vs. State of Uttarakhand-20/11/2019 - RAPE-The attempt to commit an offence begins when the accused commences to do an act with the necessary intention. In the present case, the accused appellant pounced upon the complainant victim, sat upon her and lifted her petticoat while the complainant victim protested against his advancements and wept.
- Corroboration of testimony of prosecutrix as a condition for judicial reliance is not a requirement of law in Rape trial - A plethora of decisions by this Court as referred to above would show that once the statement of prosecutrix inspires confidence and accepted by the courts as such, conviction can be based only on the solitary evidence of the prosecutrix and no corroboration would be required unless there are compelling reasons which necessitate the courts for corroboration of her statement.
- Corroboration of testimony of victim in rape case is not warranted if circumstances not demanding it ? - “A rape! a rape....................Yes, you have ravish’d justice; Forced her to do your pleasure.”
- If a married woman raped, internal or external injuries may not be found - Admittedly the prosecutrix was already a married lady and, therefore, it was not necessary that some external or internal injuries should have been found on her person. No doubt, it is true that doctor could not give any definite opinion with regard to commission of offence, but, it was not the case of the appellants that they had not committed […]
- Kerala HC found evidence to prosecute Catholic Bishop Franco Mulakkal for raping a Catholic Nun in June 2018 - It is also held that since there are allegations of repeated acts of rape, proof of more than one instance of rape would result in the commission of 376(2)(n) IPC, which being a distinct offence, each of the single instances of rape can be tried along with the distinct offence of 376(2)(n) IPC, under sec. 220(4) of Cr.P.C.
- Legal presumption as to absence of consent, when can be raised-SC Explained Sec 114A of Evidence Act (30/01/2023) - Section 375 IPC-There is a difference between giving a false promise and committing breach of promise by the accused. In case of false promise, the accused right from the beginning would not have any intention to marry the prosecutrix and would have cheated or deceited the prosecutrix by giving a false promise to marry her only with a view to satisfy his lust, whereas in case of breach of promise, one cannot deny a possibility that the accused might have given a promise with all seriousness to marry her, and subsequently might have encountered certain circumstances unforeseen by him or the circumstances beyond his control, which prevented him to fulfill his promise. So, it would be a folly to treat each breach of promise to marry as a false promise and to prosecute a person for the offence under Section 376. As stated earlier, each case would depend upon its proved facts before the court.
- Prashant Bharti vs State Of NCT Of Delhi (23/01/2013) - No pleadings whatsoever have been filed by the complainant. Even during the course of hearing, the material relied upon by the accused was not refuted. As a matter of fact, the complainant/prosecutrix had herself approached the High Court, with the prayer that the first information lodged by her, be quashed. It would therefore be legitimate to conclude, in the facts and circumstances of this case, that the material relied upon by the accused has not been refuted by the complainant/prosecutrix.
- PROFORMA FOR EXAMINATION OF ALLEGED RAPE CASE (FEMALE-Victim) - PROFORMA FOR EXAMINATION OF ALLEGED RAPE CASE (FEMALE) Requisition from______________________of Police Station _________________ vide his letter No.__________________________Dated_________________ Name (In full) ___________________________________________ Age as assessed____________Sex__________________M.L.C. No._____ Occupation__________________________Address________________________ Date of Examination____________ Time of Examination_____________________ Alleged time of offence _______AM/PM_________________ Married/Unmarried Brought by____________________________________ Consent for examination – Victim_____________________________________ Guardian _____________________________________ Identification Marks (1)________________________________________ (2) _____________________________________ History/Detailed account of occurrences as given by woman, […]
- Quick consideration of mercy petition and swift rejection the same cannot be ground for judicial review: SC on rejecting a petition by Nirbhya Rape-Murder Accused - Mukesh Kumar vs UOI-Article 32 of the Constitution-a death-row convict -The petitioner has filed the writ petition challenging the rejection of his mercy petition by the President of India and seeking commutation of his death sentence inter alia on the following grounds
- Rapist Bishop Mulakkal got bail from Kerala High Court - 15.10.2018-Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan of the Kerala High Court on Monday granted bail [Bail Appl./6927/2018-BISHOP DR. FRANCO MULAKKAL Versus STATE OF KERALA] to Roman Catholic Bishop Franco Mulakkal, arrested over allegations of repeatedly raping and sexually assaulting a nun. While granting Bail condition imposed to the accused Bishop to surrender his passport and not to enter Kerala state except for appearing before the […]
- SANTOSH PRASAD @ SANTOSH KUMAR VS THE STATE OF BIHAR-14/2/2020 - Sections 376 and 450 of the IPC-It cannot be disputed that there can be a conviction solely based on the evidence of the prosecutrix. However, the evidence must be reliable and trustworthy. Therefore, now let us examine the evidence of the prosecutrix and consider whether in the facts and circumstances of the case is it safe to convict the accused solely based on the deposition of the prosecutrix, more particularly when neither the medical report/evidence supports nor other witnesses support and it has come on record that there was an enmity between both the parties.
- Sham Singh Vs The State of Haryana-21/08/2018 - Rape Case acquittal -Trial Court and the High Court have convicted the accused merely on conjectures and surmises. The Courts have come to the conclusion based on assumptions and not on legally acceptable evidence, but such assumptions were not well founded, inasmuch as such assumptions are not corroborated by any reliable evidence. Medical evidence does not support the case of the prosecution relating to offence of rape.
- Supreme court Direction to the police on receipt of Rape Case - 25-04-2014 : There is a pressing need to introduce drastic amendments into the Code of Criminal Procedure in the nature of fast tract procedure for Fast Track Courts when we considered just and appropriate to issue notice and called upon the Union of India to file its response as to why it should not take initiative and sincere steps for […]
- The State of Jammu and Kashmir Vs Deepak Khajuria and others. [Kathu Rape Case] - District and Sessions Court, Pathankot Case Details Case Type: SC – SESSIONS CASES Filing Number: 815/2018Filing Date: 30-05-2018 Registration Number: 34/2018Registration Date: 30-05-2018 CNR Number: PBPO01-001505-2018 Case Status First Hearing Date: 30th May 2018 Decision Date: 10th June 2019 Case Status: CASE DISPOSED Nature of Disposal: Contested–CONVICTED Court Number and Judge: 1-District and Sessions Judge Petitioner and Advocate 1) State Advocate- Public Prosecutor Respondent and Advocate 1) Deepak Khajuria […]