|
|
Recent report of SCW on Pipili Rape case- A legal
review
Dear Dharitri,
Please refer to the Report of State Commission for Women (SCW) on Pipili
Rape Case, as reported in The Dharitri. Recent investigation of rape
incident by SCW in narrow sense deserves to be criticized. As per media
reports, SCW appears to have referred the medical reports to confirm the
incident of rape from narrow legal angle of Section 375 of Indian Penal
Code (IPC). As per Section 375 of the IPC , rape is defined in India as
intentional, unlawful sexual intercourse with a woman without her
consent. The essential elements of this definition are 'sexual
intercourse with a woman' and’ the absence of consent’. Whereas, section
354 of the IPC separately deals with 'criminal assault on a woman with
intent to outrage her modesty' and Section 377 IPC covers 'carnal
intercourse against the order of nature'. By referring these two
sections (section 354 & 377) verdicts of Supreme Court has many often
tried to define the rape on women in a wider sense and therefore, these
two sections have potentials to bring powerless minorities, such as
socially backward & secluded individuals, bonded labourers, prison
inmates, sex workers and others under definition of rape. For example
Public Interest Litigation before the Supreme Court (Sakshi v. Union of
India, 2004) has delivered following opinion in court of law. ... the
interpretation [by which such other forms of abuse as offences fall
under Section 354 IPC or Section 377 IPC] is ... contrary to the
contemporary understanding of sexual abuse and violence all over the
world. There has been for some time a growing body of feminist legal
theory and jurisprudence which has clearly established rape as an
experience of humiliation, degradation and violation rather than an
outdated notion of penile/vaginal penetration. Restricting an
understanding of rape reaffirms the view that rapists treat rape as sex
and not violence and thereby condone such behaviour. Therefore, SCW
constituted for protecting, promoting the interests of women could have
investigated the injuries caused to the victim from the viewpoints of
humiliation, degradation, and violation occurred to the victim and
accordingly could have dynamically/radically confirmed the incident of
rape occurred to the victim rather than merely referring the medical
reports that have been prepared in very uneven politicized
circumstances. The honesty and sincerity maintained in medical reports,
as prepared during politicized circumstances, will always be doubted.
As per media reports, the SCW by referring the FIR has noted a ligature
mark of injury on the neck of the victim who was found to be lying
unconscious and half necked in a field. This observation by SCW could
have been sufficient for redefining the section 354 of IPC in the light
of above observation of Supreme Court (Sakshi v. Union of India, 2004).
It would have helped SCW for radically declaring that the Victim has
been raped. I think, the SCW could have realized their very sense of
responsibility and mandate, while making such a stereotype report
(perhaps in favour of state government, as alleged by opposition !! ).
Thanks.
S. Mahapatra
|