Home > India > Report

Anti-rape bill in LS today, takes age of consent back 30 years

Tuesday, Mar 19, 2013, 10:00 IST | Place: New Delhi | Agency: DNA

Facing strong opposition from various political parties on lowering the age of consent for sex from 18 to 16 years, the government has agreed to stick to 18 years.

Facing strong opposition from various political parties on lowering the age of consent for sex from 18 to 16 years, the government has agreed to stick to 18 years and also water down provisions on stalking and voyeurism in a bill which seeks to hand down stringent punishment for crimes against women.

The major amendment was dropping a clause to reduce the age of consent for sex from 18 to 16. But strange as it may sound, the age had already been reduced from 18 to 16 in 1983 through an amendment carried out in Sec 376 of the IPC.

Analysts believe the government is responsible for all the confusion and now, it had to increase the age to 18. The BJP said the clause was unacceptable to the Indian society even 30 years after its enactment.

Now that the bill has been cleared by the Union cabinet, it will be introduced in the Lok Sabha on Tuesday. The Centre plans to pass it before Friday to replace the Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance issued in February. It succeeded in securing a consensus after two rounds of all-party meetings.

The BJP and other parties were strongly lobbying against the lowering of the consent age on grounds that it would result in pre-marital sex and several unwanted pregnancies, without knowing that the IPC had already fixed it at 16 three decades ago.

Law minister Ashwani Kumar said the cabinet guarantees a “sanitised and civilised” law.

The bill retains more or less the same provisions that were put in the February 3 ordinance on the recommendations of the 3-member jurists panel led by former CJI JS Verma, except that it is back to “rape” instead of “sexual assault” and it is not gender neutral.

The provisions for punishment to women for making false complaints has been struck out after the law ministry pointed out that it is already covered under sections 183 to 211 of the IPC.

@DNA