The proposed changes will bar lawyers to adduce evidence or put questions during the cross examination of a victim that talk about her general immoral character.
Manufacturing doubts about the character of a rape victim on the basis of her past record — concocted or otherwise — in courtrooms has been an old trick with lawyers defending the culprit in such cases. The mental harassment inflicted on the victim through the legal process aiming to cast aspersions on her character is often more damaging than the original crime against her.
The Centre wants to correct this. It is seeking to amend section 146 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The proposed changes, sources said, will bar lawyers to adduce evidence or put questions during the cross examination of a victim that talk about her general immoral character, her previous sexual experience with any person proving her consent or the quality of consent during trial for rape or sexual assault.
Besides, a new section, 53A, would be added in the act to ensure that the moral character of the victim and her previous sexual experience are not relevant to the issue of her consenting for sex with the accused during the trial. These proposed amendments are being examined by a committee headed by home secretary GK Pillai.
The law commission had recommended such amendments in 1983. The Supreme Court, too, had felt the need for corrective action while holding that a victim of rape can’t be treated as an accomplice in the crime.
Changes are also planned in the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to specify that in cases of rape, sexual assault and molestation, the statement of a victim would only be recorded by a woman police officer or a woman government official, in the absence of whom it would be recorded by a recognised female social worker. The trial would also be conducted before a woman judge, as far as possible.
“We find that the victim is so disturbed that she shies away from talking in detail about the incident. There are questions put to her that make her relive those moments again and again. It would be fair to bring these amendments and allow fast-track trials by women judges,” said justice Geeta Mittal of the Delhi high court.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}