An NGO called Sakshi attempted to draw attention to violence against women and filed a petition in the supreme court stating that any form of forced penetration is considered rape under section 375 of the indian penal code. Sakshi asserted that the existing law violates both India’s international obligations under numerous organs and the Indian Constitution by restricting rape to vaginal penetration alone.
sakshi v union of india Case Facts
- An NGO by the name of Sakshi assists women with a variety of needs, including housing, legal, medical, and many other types of support, mostly for those who have experienced sexual abuse or harassment or other offenses.
- The NGO filed a PIL in this matter to have the definition of “rape” under section 375 of the Indian Penal Code changed to just include penile/vaginal penetration, not the other types, such as penile/oral, penile/anal, or finger/vaginal.
- The increasingly common occurrence of child sexual abuse was specifically brought up in this. In this context, the petition also discusses international treaties and constitutional rights. Writ Petition filed through PIL under Sakshi article 32 of the indian constitution.
- The Union of India, the Ministry of Law and Justice, and the Commissioner of Police, New Delhi, are the defendants. The petition asked for a number of reliefs, including the expansion of the definition of “rape” and a directive based on the particular facts and circumstances of the case.
sakshi v union of india Issues
- Should sexual abuse of women and minors that involves penetrations other than penile or vaginal ones be classified as offenses under section 377 ipc as unnatural offenses or as offenses falling according to Section 354 of the IPC as outraging the modesty of women?
Contentions by the Parties
Petitioner:
- The petitioner’s attorneys argued that the definition of rape under Section 375 IPC was out of date and did not accurately represent modern conceptions of sexual violence, which saw rape as more than only penile or vaginal penetration but as an act of humiliation and violation.
- In order to secure justice for all victims of sexual abuse, they contended that since the term “sexual intercourse” was not defined specifically in the IPC, it should be understood by judges to embrace all forms of penetration.
- They also highlighted the serious psychological damage that non-penile/vaginal penetrations, which should have been considered rape, caused.
Respondent:
- The respondent’s attorneys argued that the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1983 had substantially changed Sections 375 and 376 IPC, giving distinct definitions and severe penalties for a number of sexual offenses.
- They argued that non-penile/vaginal penetrations should be treated as unnatural offenses under section 377 ipc, which carries harsh penalties.
- The Respondents contended that it would be unnecessary and may create legal ambiguity for judges to redefine the term “sexual intercourse.” They insisted that the legislature ought to make any modifications to the law.
sakshi v union of india Judgment
- The Supreme Court ruled that all forms of penetration could not be included in the definition of rape according to Section 375 IPC through judicial interpretation.
- It was underlined that this kind of interpretation would necessitate word substitution, which is against the rules of statutory interpretation. Although the Court recognized the petitioner’s concerns, it came to the conclusion that legislative action, not judicial interpretation, should be used to amend the definition of rape.
- The Court acknowledged that more comprehensive legal protection was necessary due to the serious trauma inflicted by different types of sexual intercourse.
- It expressed optimism that the legislature will move quickly to change the legislation in order to fully address these concerns. In order to safeguard child victims during trials, the Court also set procedural recommendations that included refraining from face-to-face confrontation with the accused, permitting recording statements, and permitting testimony via closed-circuit television.
The court grants the petition and directs that an investigation or trial of the charges be conducted in accordance with sections 354 and 377 of the Indian penal code, in addition to the Criminal Procedure Code’s Section 327, Subsection 2. When having a trial for child abuse or rape, certain procedures must be made so that the victims’ testifiers, who are witnesses, do not see the accused’s body since doing so could make the victim feel afraid.
The presiding officer of the court should get the written questions that will be asked during cross-examination so that they can be stated in an understandable and unflinching manner. When necessary, victims in certain cases will be permitted to take breaks while testifying.
With the goal of giving students the best coaching available for law entrance exams including the CLAT, AILET, and various other numerous state judiciary exams, Jyoti Judiciary Coaching, India’s Finest educational Platform, was established. Come enrol now with Jyoti Judiciary!
For any latest news, legal topics, judiciary exams notifications, patterns, etc watch Jyoti Judiciary’s YouTube channel for legal videos for any updates at https://youtube.com/@jyotijudiciarycoaching4852?si=2cwubh9d2A9urwJf