Experts said of the six categories specified under section 375 of the IPC, proving rape when the victim was in an inebriated condition or is of unsound state of mind is the toughest.
Though courts have heard rape cases where the victim was intoxicated, most of them are closed as “true but undetected”. The case of the Finnish national raped earlier this week brings the law and city’s mindset into focus
MUMBAI: The alleged rape of a 36-year-old Latvia-born Finnish national on December 13 at Parsik Hill in Navi Mumbai by an as yet unidentified person has turned the spotlight to the issue of safety of women in the city and how legal force can be used to ensure it. As defined in the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860, rape is an offence punishable with a minimum jail sentence of seven years and a maximum of life-imprisonment. Experts said of the six categories specified under section 375 of the IPC, proving rape when the victim was in an inebriated condition or is of unsound state of mind is the toughest.
Rape is committed, as per section 375, when a man has sexual intercourse with a woman under six circumstances —against her will, under threat of dire circumstances, when he is not her husband but she believes he is, under unsoundness of her mind, under intoxication and when she is a minor. Even when a man takes the consent of an intoxicated woman for sexual intercourse, she can still file a case of rape against him as the woman was not in a position to understand the “nature and consequences” of her act.
“Although it amounts to rape, unless the woman gives some description about the offender, tracing him becomes difficult for the investigating agency,” said Rohini Salian, former chief public prosecutor of the City Civil and Sessions Court, Fort. In the case of the Finnish national, the Navi Mumbai police are finding it hard to make headway in their investigations as they say the victim has not disclosed any information that can lead them to the perpetrator. Not even the number of the car or its make is known to the police yet.
An impression is often given that the woman was of “loose character” or had “let her guard down”. The law rules out casting slurs on the woman’s reputation. The Union Cabinet introduced the Indian Evidence (Amendment) Bill, 2002 that rules out the relevance of the rape victim’s previous character in her cross-examination. After the bill was passed, section 155(4) that permitted the accused to attempt to prove that the victim was of “immoral character” was deleted. This means the victim could have also been a sex worker, but if she was subjected to a sexual intercourse under the circumstances mentioned under section 375 of the IPC, it would still amount to rape.
Criminal lawyer Shyam Keswani says when the statement of the victim gives no cues to the police they have to rely on other evidence. “If the marks found on the body of the woman match with those on the man’s body or his clothes then it can be established that he has had contact with her body,” he explained. Salian also says that a DNA test can be clinching, but to zero in on the offenders the police have to carry out additional investigations like examining the spot and finding eyewitnesses. Keswani could not recall a conviction in a case where the rape victim was mentally unsound or intoxicated. Salian also said that even though such cases come before the court, most of them are closed as “true but undetected”.
){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}