Why in News?
- Chief Justice of India B. R. Gavai publicly condemned the 1979 Supreme Court acquittal in the Tukaram v. State of Maharashtra (Mathura rape case), calling it an “institutional embarrassment.”
- CJI’s remarks highlight India’s evolving anti-rape legal framework, reforms in consent definitions, custodial rape protections, and contemporary changes under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023.
- Article traces the entire legal trajectory from 1972 to 2023, linking reforms to public outrage and judicial criticism.
Relevance :
- GS2: Polity & Social Justice
- Evolution of criminal law, custodial violence, women’s safety laws
- BNS 2023 changes (gender neutrality, consent definition)
- Judicial interpretations shaping reforms (Mathura, Nirbhaya)
- GS1: Society (Women Issues)
- Gender norms, patriarchal biases in law enforcement
Understanding the Mathura Rape Case (Tukaram Case, 1972–79)
- Survivor: Tribal girl, 14–16 years, sexually assaulted inside a police station by two policemen.
- Trial Court (1974): Disbelieved survivor, labeled her “habituated”; held no rape proven.
- Bombay High Court (1976): Convicted policemen, recognized power imbalance and coercion.
- Supreme Court (1979): Acquitted the accused, arguing:
- No injuries → “peaceful intercourse”
- Survivor “did not resist”
- Reflected a patriarchal, colonial-era understanding of consent.
Turning Point: The 1979 Open Letter
- Written by: Upendra Baxi, Lotika Sarkar, Vasudha Dhagamwar, Raghunath Kelkar.
- Key arguments:
- Submission ≠ Consent
- Absence of resistance ≠ consent
- Court ignored:
- Power of police
- Survivor’s age
- Illegality of calling minor girls to police station at night
- Socio-economic vulnerability
- Sparked national protests → beginning of India’s modern women’s rights movement.
Immediate Legal Reforms Triggered
Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1983
- Custodial rape created as a separate aggravated offence.
- Burden of proof shifted to the accused in custodial rape cases after intercourse is proved.
- Strengthened:
- Dowry Act penalties
- Family Courts
- First major statutory shift recognising coercive environments.
Evolution Through Major Cases & Movements
Nandini Satpathy Case (1978)
- Justice Krishna Iyer:
- Women cannot be summoned to police stations.
- Must be questioned at residence.
- Highlighted custodial vulnerabilities even before Mathura verdict.
Bhanwari Devi Case & Vishaka Guidelines (1992–1997)
- Bhanwari Devi gangraped for stopping child marriage.
- Vishaka Guidelines (1997) laid foundational framework for workplace sexual harassment law.
- Recognised State obligation to ensure safe working spaces for women.
Nirbhaya Case & Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013
- Rape-and-murder of a 22-year-old physiotherapy intern (Dec 2012).
- Massive protests → Justice J.S. Verma Committee → sweeping reforms:
- Definition of rape expanded beyond penetration.
- Police non-registration of FIR punishable.
- Hospitals mandated free treatment to survivors.
- Silence or “feeble no” ≠ consent.
- Age of consent raised to 18.
- Death penalty for extreme cases & repeat offenders.
Unnao and Kathua Cases (2017–18) & Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2018
- Unnao: MLA Kuldeep Sengar convicted for rape of a minor.
- Kathua: Minor girl gangraped and murdered.
- Reforms:
- Death penalty for rape of girls below 12 years.
- Minimum 20-year sentence for rape of girls below 16.
- Fast-tracked:
- Investigation: 2 months
- Trial: 2 months
- Appeals: 6 months
Latest Phase: Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023
- Major overhaul replacing IPC.
- Key changes:
- Sexual offences made gender-neutral for victims and perpetrators.
- Gangrape of a woman below 18: death or life imprisonment.
- New offence: sexual intercourse under false pretences/false promise of marriage.
- Expanded definition of:
- Sexual harassment
- Non-consensual sexual acts not covered earlier
- Reflects modern understanding of consent and coercion.
Themes Underlying India’s Legal Evolution
- Recognition of power asymmetry (custodial, caste, economic, institutional).
- Increasing acknowledgment that:
- Consent must be affirmative, voluntary.
- Lack of resistance is not consent.
- Greater victim-sensitive procedures:
- FIR rights
- Medical care
- Shifting burden in custodial cases
- Faster trials in minors’ cases
- Progressive move away from:
- Stereotypes about “chastity,” “habituality,” “conduct”
- Injury-based understanding of rape
Challenges That Continue
- Low conviction rates (~27–33% nationally).
- Police bias, investigative lapses, hostile environments.
- Victim intimidation, delays in evidence collection.
- Need for:
- Better forensics
- Survivor support systems
- Gender-sensitisation of police and judiciary
