Know The Law
The Unseen Perpetrators: Who Slip Through the Cracks
The National Crime
Records Bureau (NCRB) report for 2021 highlights alarming statistics on rape
cases in India. There were 65,025 reported rape cases during the year. This
represents a 19.34% increase in rape cases compared to 2020. However, it is
important to note that underreporting remains a significant concern due to
factors such as stigma, lack of trust in the criminal justice system, and
social pressure on victims to remain silent. Who can be the victim in these
situations is where all the ambiguity begins.
The Oxford Dictionary
defines rape as the crime of forcing somebody to have sex when
they do not want it or are not able to agree to it. However, S.375 of
the Indian Penal Code of 1860 (which defines what constitutes "Rape")
states otherwise. Initially, it states, " A man is said to commit “rape” who,
except in the case hereinafter excepted, has sexual intercourse with a woman -". There is an emphasis on the gender of
the perpetrator being a man and the victim being a woman.
Let's use two instances
to be able to acknowledge the anachronistic nature of and associated chasms
within this definition.
THE FIRST
A group of three is
hanging out at a party, having the time of their young life, immersing
themselves in everything a 20-something indulges in for recreation and
subsequently loses control over his senses. Come morning, all three of them
find themselves in a precarious situation, which is considered a nightmare for
half the world's population.
The friends are lying
astray all through the party spot, and as they wake up, they find themselves at
the behest of a stranger who is forcing himself on them and taking advantage of
their compromised state.
The first friend is
enraged and aghast and rattles at the stranger and threatens to pursue criminal
charges.
The second friend is more
amused than concerned and doesn't pay much thought to what has conspired.
The third friend is in a
predicament; is scared of what has occurred but is also confused about the
recourse that ought to be pursued if at all one is available.
Let us fill in the
details if it has not occurred to you yet.
The first friend, a
woman, woke up to find a man penetrating her as she lay unconscious. She felt
violated and threatened the man with the well-known recourse available to her.
The second friend, a man,
woke up to find a woman forcing herself on him. However, he perceived it as an
amusing rather than a heinous violation of his body because his social
conditioning directs one to presuppose a woman's sexual advances as only
positive without having an iota of regard for consent.
The third friend, a
woman, woke up to find a woman taking advantage of her insentient state. She
felt violated and wished to take action but felt absolutely defenseless. The
law of her land doesn't acknowledge her situation as requiring redressal.
The irony of this tale is
that though all three friends are similarly circumstanced, only the first
friend is relatively fortunate. She is the only one with a silver lining in the
form of a legal remedy, and society recognizes her plight as legitimate.
THE SECOND
Four strangers drag a
woman off her path to her home and take her to a dingy place. Unfortunately,
her fate is apparent, and she is subjected to unimaginable tribulation and
suffering.
The first stranger forces
her to perform fellatio on him.
The second stranger
inserts a wooden stick in her anal cavity.
The third stranger forces
her to penetrate one of the other strangers with her fingers.
The last stranger
violates her by applying his mouth to her private parts.
The woman ultimately,
escapes the ordeal and files charges against the four strangers. Subsequently,
they are convicted, however, distinctly.
As per the law, the four
acts done by the perpetrators all manifest as the sub-clauses of Section 375 of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which deals with what constitutes rape in India.
The only factor that makes the charges vary is that the last stranger is a
woman and hence, according to law, "incapable" of rape.
Victims are discouraged
from reporting rape incidents due to the restrictive definition and social stigma.
Many survivors are afraid of being judged, blamed, or retaliated against, which
leads to severe underreporting and a lack of access to justice and support
services.
INADEQUACY OF S. 375:
TURNING A BLATANT BLIND EYE
Male Victims: The definition's emphasis on male perpetrators and female
victims ignores the fact that men can be victims of sexual violence as well.
This exclusion contributes to the societal stigma associated with male
victimisation and restricts their access to justice and support services.
Same-Sex Rape: The present definition excludes incidents in which the
perpetrator and victim are of the same gender. As a result, victims of same-sex
rape do not have appropriate legal protection or acknowledgement for their
experiences.
Transgender and
Non-binary Victims: The definition does not
address sexual violence against transgender or non-binary people. This omission
ignores the unique obstacles and vulnerabilities individuals may confront and
fails to provide them with adequate legal remedy.
Currently, India does not
even consider homosexuality a crime, let alone a heinous one. Therefore, the
Verma Committee recommended making the offence of rape gender-inclusive
concerning the victim and including men and the LGBTQ community. However, it
was argued that unless the LGBTQ community is granted the right to engage in
consensual sexual intercourse in the first place, such laws would only serve as
a tool to harass and abuse them. But now situation is different and law
must provide the remedy.
ALTERNATIVES THAT BEING
PRESENTED: Potential avenues waiting exploration
It is being said that
such cases can be filed under sexual assault that may not be
sufficient to address the issue. Therefore, it is essential to recognize the
severity of non-consensual sexual intercourse and ensure that adequate measures
are in place to address it, regardless of the sexual orientation or gender of
the individuals involved.
While some argue that
increasing the severity of punishment for sexual assault in those cases where
the offender is a woman would offer a potential redressal, others insist that
it would be as good as a chocolate teapot given the marginal victim base and
the ancillary nature of remedy provided for upon the charge of sexual assault.
Advocates of severe punishment
for female offenders insist that if a crime has a marginal victim base that is
no justification for not having an equitable punishment.
Besides that, even though
a case of sexual assault is fairly made out in such instances, that provides no
alternative to a rape charge, even though it entails every element of rape
under the I.P.C. but the requisite gender of the offender.
Other gives the
alternative under S.377 of IPC 1860. It is an archaic law that originated during
colonial times, which penalizes sexual intercourse that goes against the
"order of nature.". However, it is essential to ponder if using the term
"unnatural" to describe such offenses is appropriate, as it can perpetuate
harmful stereotypes and stigmatize individuals based on their sexual
orientation. In other words, we need to be mindful of the language we use when
discussing these issues, as it can have scaling implications for how people are
perceived and subsequently treated.
ARGUMENTS THAT ARE BEING
MADE
Those who consider women
to be incapable of committing rape offer a four-pronged argument.
First, that rape is an
offence that attenuates the dignity of a woman, and it is a far cry that any
degeneration of that kind will ever occur with men.
Second, forced
penetration done to someone is graver when compared to being forced to
penetrate someone. Hence, a woman suffers more in a non-consensual sexual act
than a man.
Third, a woman can't
commit rape as the man will presumably not show signs of sexual arousal for
penetrative intercourse if his intention to participate in the sexual act is
absent.
Lastly, India has had a
history of women being considered chattel of their male next of kin and have
been systematically suppressed. As a result, it is hard to conceive a woman as
a cold-blooded offender. Additionally, it is presumed that a man is physically
more powerful than a woman.
Let us deconstruct the
aforementioned arguments.
First, the argument about
the degeneration of the purity and dignity of a woman when rape is committed on
her has misogynistic undertones, which implies that a woman loses a significant
part of her being permanently whenever she is urged to undergo the ineffable
ordeal. However, it must be noted that her dignity as a person will always
remain regardless of her getting raped because otherwise, it would suggest that
women have little value beyond their sexuality. If the latter view is taken, we
will also have to acknowledge that women are sufficiently capable of committing
sexual offences in the exercise, even though illegal and for the sake of their
pleasure, of their agency, and autonomy.
Second, rape is not only
a physical violation but also a mental violation, and, in most cases, mental
trauma is far more than any physical injury. Thus, even though a male might not
go through as much physical trauma as his female counterpart would ordinarily
do when in a similar circumstance, he cannot be taken not to go through, if not
more, at least the same measure of mental trauma as his female counterpart
would in a similar situation. In fact, when dealing with sexual offences at
large, the focal point should be determining the presence of consent instead of
the gender-based capability of the potential offender.
Third, medical science
has proven that sexual 'arousal' has little to do with the willingness to
indulge in intercourse, as it is a biological response to stimulation and
therefore cannot be taken as conclusive proof of consent (not even implied) in
cases where the victim demonstrates physical signs of arousal. For instance,
regardless of female orgasm after intercourse, it was held to be rape owing to
the victim's lack of free and voluntary consent. Therefore, the argument of
sexual arousal as a cushion against the offence of rape is hardly tenable.
Lastly, it is an
anachronistic view that women are incapable of meeting atrocities. It is an
egregious form of gender-based stereotyping, which, among other things, is also
equivalent to turning a blind eye towards the suffering of male victims.
Additionally, it is an ableist presumption that a man will, no
matter what, always be physically more robust than a woman and will never be
overtaken by the administration of intoxicants and psychotropic substances.
A POTENTIAL SOLUTION
Ever since its enactment
in 1860, S.375 of the Indian Penal Code has undergone several revisions apropos
the definition of ‘rape’. These amendments have sought to broaden the
application of the provision and make it more stringent, in keeping with the
society’s changing attitudes towards sexual assault. The 2013 Criminal Law
Amendment intumesced ‘rape’ to include object insertion, application of mouth
to the vagina of a woman, and anal penetration (According
to Criminal Law Amendment Section 375, 2013). As a result, it is no longer
tenable to assert that women are incapable of raping their male counterparts or
that the victim can only be ‘females’.
Thus, in keeping with the
changing dynamics of the time, it would be in the best interest of everyone
that ‘man’ in S.375 of the I.P.C. be interpreted in consonance with the
definition of; man in the General Clauses Act, which stipulates a gender-neutral
meaning of the term ‘man’ – thereby meaning that ‘man’ would be equivalent to
‘person’. This change is much exigent for meeting the ends of justice by
shedding our gendered perception of sexual offenses.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court
had rightly pointed out the inaccuracy inherent in the pronouncement of Priya Patel
V. State of M.P. (2006)
(Ref: 6 SCC 263) which provided that given the bare tenor of S.375, I.P.C., it
would be incorrect to convict a woman under S.375 or S.376D. It was
subsequently attempted to be corrected in Om Prakash V. Union of India, wherein
the court had observed that regardless of the literal tenor of S.375, a woman
can be convicted for abetment to commit rape under S.109. Thus, it is pertinent
to note that though some progress has been made apropos the interpretation of
provisions such as rape, there is still a long way to go. Adopting a ‘General
Clauses Act-definition of the word man and woman’ for S.375 would not only
bring women within the radar of the provision since women may rape another
woman or a man by adopting one (i.e., under sub-section (a) to S.375) but any
of methods provided under sub-sections (b), (c) and (d) to S.375. As a result,
women would also come within the radar of S. 376D and would be as much likely
to be penalized as a man for the offense of rape. It is time we heed this
pressing concern and pursue a worthy resolution to ensure that the ends of
justice are met.
Written By - Manjari Tripathi & Sujal Garg
Author Bio:
Manjari Tripathi: She is a 2nd Year Law Student at Dharmashastra National Law University,
Jabalpur. Keen to explore topics that are overlooked within society through
legal content writing. She is passionate about focusing on marginalized
communities and neglected subjects that often go unnoticed. She believes that
every legal issue, no matter how obscure, deserves attention &
understanding.
Sujal Garg: He is a 3rd-year law student at the National Law University, Jabalpur.
He has a strong interest in law and believes in making a meaningful impact
through his skills. He has participated in various courses & internships
related to legal research, writing & analysis. He strives to create
engaging and informative legal content that resonates with readers. He believes
in the power of effective communication to raise awareness and incite positive
change.