Definition of rape should be widened

Cases relating to rape and violence against women and denial of property rights to daughters are on the rise if judgments by the Supreme Court (SC) are any trend indicator.

A Delhi high court judge, justice S Muralidhar, has touched upon another aspect of  violence against women called ‘digital rape’. Digital rape is inserting finger into a victim’s private part.

Muralidhar used this expression to enumerate the different forms of abuse women underwent. “The criminal law of our country does not recognise this form (digital rape) of sexual assault as a heinous crime. As a result, the culprit gets a lesser punishment for use of criminal force to outrage the modesty of a woman,” he observed.

This lack of respect for something as basic as a woman’s modesty has irked justice Murlidhar.   “It is a matter of grave concern that nothing has been done till date...Absence of stringent law to deal with impunity,” he observed while dismissing an appeal filed by 54-year-old Tara Dutt, father of four daughters, who was convicted of committing digital rape on a five-year-old relative in 1996.

“The growing instances in the recent past of sexual assault of minors should serve as a wake-up call to make the appropriate amendments to the IPC without further delay,” Muralidhar observed while suggesting that legislators should comply with the Law Commission report submitted nine years ago.

On June 7, 1996, Dutt had forced his fingers into the private parts of a five-year-old girl when her mother, a domestic help, was away.

Bottom pinching which has been dealt with under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is also another form of abuse. It may recalled that former Punjab top cop KPS Gill was accused of pinching the bottom of a senior IAS officer. He faced flak from the SC which explained the importance of a woman’s modesty.