Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 18

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

STATE OF RAJASTHAN.(Appellants)
VERSUS
BHAARLAL AND OTHERS...(RESPONDENT)
(MEMORIAL FOR THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND THE COMPLAINANT)
1
In!e"
#) In!e" $% A&t'$()t)es*
+) State,ent $% J&()s!)-t)$n....
*) Iss&es/
.) S0n$ps)s O% Fa-ts...1
/) S&,,a(0 O% A(2&,ents.#3
1) A(2&,ents.#+
4) P(a0e(#5
#) In!e" $% A&t'$()t)es
2
)) Cases
In Bhupinder Sharma v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (2003) 8 S !!"
Pramod #ahto and $thers v. State of Bihar, "%8% Supp. (2) S &'2
Shri Bodhisatt(a )autam vs #iss Su*hra ha+ra*ort, "%%& -I. %22, "%%& S
State of /arnata+a v. .a0u, -I. 200' S 322!
-ir India v. 1ar2esh #eer3a "%8"(4) S 33!5 -I. "%8" S "82%
#uthamma v. 6nion of India "%'% -I. "8&8, "%80 S. (") &&8
))) Stat&tes
In!)an Penal C$!e #613 (IPC)
C$!e $% C(),)nal P($-e!&(e #54* (CRPC)
T'e In!)an E7)!en-e A-t #64+
T'e C$nst)t&t)$n O% In!)a A(t)-le #/(*)
)))) A(t)-les
guestpost by Mrinal Satish, Associate Professor, National Law University, Del
-rticle *, (7r. #u+esh 8adav, -ssoc. Professor, 7eptt. of 9orensic #edicine) #.#. Institute
of #edical Sciences : .esearch
1ational Polic, for ;mpo(erment of <omen
3
+) State,ent $% J&()s!)-t)$n
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
B8 VIRTUE OF ARTICLE #*. OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
4
*) Iss&es
#) 'et'e( t'e P&n)s',ent 2)7en 90 t'e H$n:9le H)2' C$&(t $% J&!)-at&(e %$(
Ra;as't'an at Ja)p&( Ben-' ;&st)%)a9le<
+) '0 s'$&l! L)%e I,p()s$n,ent n$t 9e a=a(!e! t$ B'a=a(lal<
5
.) S0n$ps)s O% Fa-ts
") =he -ppellant is #s. Shalini a2ed a*out 20 ,ears is a nursin2 student livin2 in
)overnment <omen>s 1ursin2 olle2e Hostel at ?aipur.
2) Shri. Bha(arlal the respondent ", a2ed a*out 30 ,ears is the cho(+idar at the
)overnment <omen>s 1ursin2 olle2e Hostel at ?aipur.
3) Shri =ri*huvan the respondent 2, a2ed a*out "8 ,ears is a spoilt millionaire student
4) Shri #ohan the respondent 3, a2ed 22 ,ears, is the son of a local #@-
!) Shri Sohan the respondent 4, a2ed 20 ,ears is in close relation of a central minister
&) Aacations (ere to commence on the "
st
of ?une 200% so there (ere onl, 3 to 4
students in the Hostel (ith a capacit, of "00 inmates and the lad, <arden left for her
home and no other emplo,ee (as there.
') #s. Shalini on the 30
th
?une 200% came on the front la(n of the hostel, at a*out
""B00pm,the main accused Shri Bha(arlal and =ri*huvan forci*l, carried her to the
cho(+idar>s ca*in, (hich (as a lonel, place.
8) #ohan and Sohan (ere heavil, drin+in2 there.
%) =he appellant>s mouth and *od, (ere tied (ith a cloth and Bha(arlal had a +nife in
his hand, (hich he used to threaten the appellant and thus made her succum* to the
force. She (as 2iven some intoCicant and dru2s and forci*l, put on the mattress and
(as raped one *, one *,, =ri*huvan, #ohan, Sohan and Bha(arlal.
"0) -fter the 2an2 rape she (as thro(n on the *ac+side of the *oundar, (all of the hostel
at a*out 4B00 am -t a*out !B00 am the appellant came to senses and (as seen *, the
passers Shri .amalal and Shri Sh,amlal (ho descri*ed that she (as in a ver, serious
condition. She (as carried to the Police Station an 9I. (as lod2es (rime 1o. %&& of
200%) under section 3&3 and 3'&(2)(2) of the IP, (ith difficult, and intervention of
the Police ommissioner. =he appellant (as admitted in the )overnment Hospital and
released after t(o (ee+s.
"") =he ho(+idar and the three accused could *e traced drun+ sleepin2 in the
ho(+idar>s room
"2) - Panchnamah (as prepared and articles confiscated *, the investi2ation officer from
the crime scene included a torn out /urta, Pa,0ama, pant,,ha(ai chappal, nonD
ve2etarian food items, tum*lers,liEuor *ottles,ci2arettes , hu++a (ith to*acco and
match*oC, other intoCicants cash .s. "0,000F .s. !0,000, four cell phones of the four
accused. =he call list sho(ed that G i) there (ere calls *et(een the four accused in the
evenin2 at 'B00pm, ii) =(o missed calls (ere *, =ri*huvan to the appellant on 2%
th

#a, 200%.- classic car #ercedes re2istered in the name of =ri*huvan>s father and the
6
drivin2 license of =ri*huvan. =here (as a motor*i+e, (hich (as re2istered in the
name of #ohan.
"3) <ithin "2 hours, the appellant had to under2o medical eCamination. =he #edical
?urist>s report stated that *lood (as seen in the va2ina and h,men of the appellant (as
found ruptured and dama2ed. =he accused (ere reEuired to under2o HSperm
7etection =est> and the report corro*orated the claim of the appellant. Presence of
semen and human spermato3oa on the *ed sheets of the mattress (ere noticed.
"4) - case under section 3'&(2)(2) read (ith section 3&4- of IP (as re2istered a2ainst
the four accused and the, (ere arrested. Shri =ri*huvan (as a*scondin2 and (as later
arrested. -fter filin2 the char2e sheet to the ourt of Sessions Shri =ri*huvan and Shri
Sohan (ere released on *ail *, Hi2h ourt. =he appellant sou2ht death sentence for
Bha(arlal and dama2es of .s 20 la+hs under section 3!' and 3!' - of the .P.
"!) =he (itness (ere crossDeCamined and stood to the testimon,.
"&) Shri =r*huvan claimed to *e a minor. He produces his horoscope, his *irth certificate
and matriculation certificate (herein he (as found to *e completed "' ,ears "0
months. -s per medical certificate he (as declared "8 ,ears. He confessed that prior
to this incident he (ith the assistance of Bha(arlal had carried one other student to a
five star hotel for a pa,ment of .s. !,000 to Bha(arlal and .s !0000 to that other
student. He claimed to have received permission from the <arden. -s he (as allured
*, the charmin2 personalit, of the appellant he had told Bha(arlal to mana2e the
appellant for .s. "0,000 for Bha(arlal and .s. !0,000 for the appellant. He claimed
that the intercourse happened 2racefull, (ith the consent of the appellant. He (as
declared a minor
"') Shri #ohan denied the char2e and claimed to *e out of to(n and said that he returned
to his house at ""B00 pm. But his *i+e (as found on the crime scene so he failed to
prove his denial
"8) Shri. Sohan corro*orated the rape stor, *ut claimed that he (as persuaded *,
=ri*huvan to have forci*le intercourse for is pleasure (ith Shri =ri*huvan (atchin2
the action.
"%) Shri. Bha(arlal confessed 2uilt, and stated that he had to coDoperate (ith =ri*huvan>s
plan as he received .s. "0,000. He said that he had 2iven the offer to the appellant to
spend one ni2ht (ith =ri*huvan for the pa,ment *ut she refused to succum* to the
offer.
20) =he sessions 0ud2e ?aipur in his 0ud2ment dated 30
th
7ecem*er 20"0 convicted the
accused asBD
Shri Bha(arlal to under2o ri2orous imprisonment for life
Shri #ohan, student to under2o ri2orous imprisonment of "0 ,ears
7
Shri. Sohan to under2o simple imprisonment for a period of "0 ,ears
Shri =ri*huvan havin2 *een proved minor, to *e dealt (ith separatel, under
the ?uvenile ?ustice -ct, 2000
7ama2es a(arded of .s. "0 la+h
2") -22rieved *, the said 0ud2ment the accused as (ell as the appellant preferred appeal
*ein2 riminal -ppeal 1o. !D8I20"" *efore the Hon>*le Hi2h ourt of ?udicature for
.a0asthan at ?aipur Bench. =he Hon>*le Hi2h ourt ta+in2 a lenient vie( of the
matter, on appreciation of defence evidence and nonDavaili*ilit, of an, independent
e,eD(itnesses reduced the sentence a(arded *, the sessions court to the follo(in2
periodB
Shri Bha(ar lal to under2o ri2orous imprisonment for "0 ,ears
Shri #ohan to under2o simple imprisonment for ! ,ears
Shri Sohan to period alread, under2one *, accused
7ama2es (ere reduced to .s !0000
22) Bein2 a22rieved *, the aforesaid orders, the appellant as (ell as the
accused, Bha(ar lal, #ohan and Sohan have filed appeal *efore the Hon>*le Supreme
ourt. =he Hon>*le Supremem ourt has issued notices confinin2 to the issues
re2ardin2 the sentences and dama2es as to (h, the sentence a(arded *,, the Hi2h
ourt to the three accused respondents *e not restored to that of the sentence a(arded
*, the supreme court and (h, the accused Bha(ar lal not to under2o life
imprisonment.
8
/) S&,,a(0 $% A(2&,ents
I) T'e a-t =as p(e>planne!
=he (as proper plannin2 involved in the act. =he evidence proves that the accused (ere in
touch of each other on the da, of the crime. Intention is esta*lished.
II) T'e ,e!)-al e7)!en-e? -)(-&,stant)al e7)!en-e an! t'e -$n%ess)$ns -$(($9$(ate t'e
-(),e st$(0
=here is seen that all the evidences add up to the crime stor,, (hich also enhances the
importance and dependa*ilit, of his evidence and this ma+es the case stron2 thou2h there is
an a*sence of e,e(itnesses.

9
III) It =as 'a9)t&al %$( T()9'&7an t$ $%%e( ,$ne0 %$( se" an! 'e !e()7e! pleas&(e 90
=at-')n2 $t'e(s pe(%$(, t'e a-t
It (as =ri*huvan (ho (as the mastermind of the act and it (as Bha(arlal (ho +idnapped m,
client. He +ne( the intention of =ri*huvan and thus he is responsi*le for the offence as the,
have acted (ith a common intention. =he other t(o accused (ere alread, a(are of the plan.
IV) T'$&2' M$'an an! S$'an =e(e )nt$")-ate!? t'e0 a(e (esp$ns)9le %$( t'e a-t
IntoCication cannot *e a defense as #ohan and Sohan (ere drin+in2 voluntaril, and if the,
(ere intoCicated to the level of not understandin2 the severit, of the crime the, (ere
committin2, ho( could it *e eCplained that the, (ere so*er enou2h to force m, client to
su*mit to the act.
V) T'e t=$ a--&se! 'a7e -$n%esse! t'e -(),e
-s the t(o accused have confessed to the crime as per the IP the minimum prescri*ed
punishment is a must. -nd in the current situation, the 2ravit, of the act increases as it (as a
preDplanned crime done under the 2uidance of a ha*itual seCDaddict i.e. =ri*huvan and (hich
(ould not have *een successful (ithout the other three accused.
VI) T'$&2' t'e p'0s)-al s-a(s $% a (ape s&(7)7$( ,a0 'eal s'e )s le%t =)t' !eep ,ental
s-a(s
- hu2e trauma and a feelin2 of violation is faced *, a rape survivor (hich ta+es ,ears to heal.
=he mental and ps,cholo2ical (ounds are painful and the, ma+e life difficult. -nd it is 0ust
that the people (ho have *rou2ht this condition on her must understand their crime and this
can *e onl, done throu2h strict punishment
VII) I% len)en-0 )s s'$=n t$ (ape -$n7)-ts t')s =)ll pass a =($n2 ,essa2e t$ t'e s$-)et0
.ape is a crime of 2eneral intent and there have to *e prohi*itive measures ta+en in order to
prevent this crime and safe2uard (omen from such individuals. In order to attain such results,
stricter punishments must *e imposed. It is held the crimes li+e rape are insti2ated in the
su*conscious and in order to prevent them there should *e harsh conseEuences lin+ed to such
crimes so that this (ould prevent such crimes
10
1) A(2&,ents
I) T'e a-t =as p(e>planne!
=here (as proper communication amon2 the accused 0ust four hours *efore the incident. =his
sho(s a stron2 intention amon2 the accused and ever,one is responsi*le for the act.
It is no coDincidence that Bha(arlal and =ri*huvan spotted m, client in the la(n of the Hostel
as the, (ere (aitin2 in the la(n for the same purpose.
=he, have *een (aitin2 for such an opportunit, and (e come to +no( this from the missed
calls 2iven *, =ri*huvan on the cell phone of m, client on the 2%
th
#a, 200%.
It is a confession of the main accused that he did +idnap the victim and act as per the plan of
=ri*huvan
In Bhupinder Sharma v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (2003) 8 S !!", the o*servations
made *, an earlier Bench in Pramod #ahto and $thers v. State of Bihar, "%8% Supp. (2) S
&'2, (ere reiterated *, this ourt as follo(sB
11
J"4. In cases of 2an2 rape the proof of completed act of rape *, each accused on the victim is
not reEuired. =he statutor, intention in introducin2 ;Cplanation I in relation to Section 3'&(2)
(2) appears to have *een done (ith a vie( to effectivel, deal (ith the 2ro(in2 menace of
2an2 rape. In such circumstances, it is not necessar, that the prosecution should adduce
clinchin2 proof of a completed act of rape *, each one of the accused on the victim or on
each one of the victims (here there are more than one in order to find the accused 2uilt, of
2an2 rape and convict them under Section 3'& IP.J
=hus in this case as there *ein2 a common intention amon2 the accused, it>s a case under
section 3'&(2)(2) of IP (here the minimum prescri*ed sentence is of "0 ,ears ri2orous
imprisonment.
II) T'e ,e!)-al e7)!en-e? -)(-&,stant)al e7)!en-e an! t'e -$n%ess)$ns -$(($9$(ate t'e
-(),e st$(0
=he medical evidence the circumstantial evidence, the prosecution (itnesses the medical
0urist each one of these stood the test of crossDeCamination and corro*orated the same stor,.
=he confessions (ere also in line (ith the stor, conve,ed5 Such corro*oration is a stron2
proof that the offence too+ place and there is no dou*t that it (as an act of force and not of
consent.
=he medical 0urist in the report clearl, stated that *lood (as seen in the va2ina and the
h,men of the appellant (as found to *e ruptured and dama2ed. =he HSperm 7etection =est
that the accused had to 2o throu2h, the report corro*orated (ith the claim of the appellant .
=here (as presence of semen and human spermato3oa on the *edsheets of the mattress.
=he (itnesses Shri .amlal and Shri Sh,amlal (ho found the appellant in a na+ed state
outside the *ac+side of the *oundar, (all of the hostel stated a*out in0ur, on the private
parts, a*rasions and *ruises on *reasts and chee+s and oo3in2 of *lood. =he confessions of
the cho(+idar Bha(arlal and Sohan *oth corro*orated the rape stor, thus ma+in2 a stron2
case.
12
III) It =as 'a9)t&al %$( T()9'&7an t$ $%%e( ,$ne0 %$( se" an! 'e !e()7e! pleas&(e 90
=at-')n2 $t'e(s pe(%$(, t'e a-t
=he master mind of the act (as =ri*huvan. It (as he (ith the help of Bha(arlal (ho
threatened and carried the appellant to his ca*in and forced her to su*mit and thus raped her.
He also administered alcohol (ith dru2s forci*l, and thus incapacitated her opposition.
9urthermore it (as also confessed *, =ri*huvan that he had even offered .s !000 to
Bha(arlal and .s. !0000 to another 2irl and carried her to a five star hotel for the entire
ni2ht. He also throu2h Bha(arlal offered .s. !0000 to the appellant to spend a ni2ht (ith him
*ut the appellant strai2ht(a, refused. It (as due to this that he forced the appellant and his
plan (ould not have *een successful (ithout the help of Bha(arlal. In Bha(arlal>s
confession it (as stated that he had the +no(led2e of this refusal and inspite of havin2 this
+no(led2e he helped =ri*huvan , this is a clear si2n that he i.e Bha(arlal had also that
common intention.
IV) T'$&2' M$'an an! S$'an =e(e )nt$")-ate!? t'e0 a(e (esp$ns)9le %$( t'e a-t
IntoCication is not a defense that can *e used *, the accused. It has *een dul, proved that
the, (ere in a heavil, drun+ condition and the, had consumed the alcohol voluntaril, and
thus as under section 8& of the IP, it is assumed that the, had the complete +no(led2e of
the conseEuences of their act. =here (as a call amon2 the four accused on the da, of the act,
(hich is a clear indication that there (as coDordination and proper intention amon2 the
accused. =he confession of Sohan adds more proof as it totall, corro*orated the rape stor,.
=hou2h #ohan did not confess the crime, his motor*i+e (as found at the crime scene. =hus
he could not provide an, valid eCplanation for the same.
=herefore #ohan and Sohan are no eCceptions to the crime and the, must *e dealt (ith in a
strict manner.
V) T'e t=$ a--&se! 'a7e -$n%esse! t'e -(),e
Bha(arlal the main accused corro*orated totall, (ith the rape stor,. -nd similarl, Sohan too
confessed. =hese confessions and their corro*orations ma+e the prosecution>s case more
stron2 and are a clear indication that the crime too+ place and it (as out of force and
13
administration of alcohol that the victim (as made to su*mit to the act and it (as totall,
a2ainst her consent.
VI) T'$&2' t'e p'0s)-al s-a(s $% a (ape s&(7)7$( ,a0 'eal s'e )s le%t =)t' !eep ,ental
s-a(s
In Shri Bodhisatt(a )autam vs #iss Su*hra ha+ra*ort, "%%& -I. %22, "%%& S It (as
stated thatD
=his ourt has, innumera*le times, declared that J.i2ht to @ifeJ does not merel, mean
animal eCistence *ut means somethin2 more, namel,, the ri2ht to live (ith human di2nit,.
(See B 9rancis oralie #ullin vs. =he -dministrator, 6nion =erritor, of 7elhi : $rs., -I.
"%8" S '4&5 State of #aharashtra vs. handra*han, -I. "%83 S 8035 $l2a =ellis : $rs.
vs. Bom*a, #unicipal orporation : $rs., -I. "%8& S "805 and 7elhi =ransport
orporation vs. 7.=.. #a3door on2ress : $rs., -I. "%%" S "0"). .i2ht to @ife (ould,
therefore, include all those aspects of life (hich 2o to ma+e a life meanin2ful, complete and
(orthDlivin2. 6nfortunatel,, a (oman, in our countr,, *elon2s to a class or 2roup of societ,
(ho are in a disadvanta2ed position on account of several social *arriers and impediments
and have, therefore, *een the victim of t,rann, at the hands of men (ith (hom the,,
fortunatel,, under the onstitution en0o, eEual status. <omen also have the ri2ht to life and
li*ert,5 the, also have the ri2ht to *e respected and treated as eEual citi3ens. =heir honour and
di2nit, cannot *e touched or violated. =he, also have the ri2ht to lead an honoura*le and
peaceful life. <omen, in them, have man, personalities com*ined. =he, are #other,
7au2hter, Sister and <ife and not pla, thin2s for center spreads in various ma2a3ines,
periodicals or ne(spapers nor can the, *e eCploited for o*scene purposes. =he, must have
the li*ert,, the freedom and, of course, independence to live the roles assi2ned to them *,
1ature so that the societ, ma, flourish as the, alone have the talents and capacit, to shape
the destin, and character of men an,(here and in ever, part of the (orld. .ape is thus not
onl, a crime a2ainst the person of a (oman (victim), it is a crime a2ainst the entire societ,. It
destro,s the entire ps,cholo2, of a (oman and pushed her into deep emotional crises. It is
onl, *, her sheer (ill po(er that she reha*ilitates herself in the societ,, (hich, on comin2 to
+no( of the rape, loo+s do(n upon
her in derision and contempt. .ape is, therefore, the most hated crime. It is a crime a2ainst
*asic human ri2hts and is also violative of the victimKs most cherished of the 9undamental
14
.i2hts, namel,, the .i2ht to @ife contained in -rticle 2". =o man, feminists and
ps,chiatrists, rape is less a seCual offence than an act of a22ression aimed at de2radin2 and
humiliatin2 (omen. =he rape la(s do not, unfortunatel,, ta+e care of the social aspect of the
matter and are inept in man, respects.
=hus as understood a*ove the repercussions of rape on the mind of the (omen on her social
status and on her social outloo+ are ver, painful. It has *een o*served especiall, in this case
that as the victim is ,oun2 and unmarried, this scar (ould *e even deeper and there ma, *e
difficult, in findin2 a proper 2room for her due to the social sti2ma attached to the victims of
rape.
It is stated in A guestpost by Mrinal Satish, Associate Professor, National Law University,
Delhi.
6nli+e other offences, the crime of rape carries its o(n *a22a2e. $ver the ,ears, stereot,pical
and patriarchal notions have developed (ith re2ard to (omen>s seCual *ehaviour. #ost of
these notions are *ased on the assumption that the chastit, and vir2init, of a (oman are her
most important Lassets.M Popular notions consider rape as a fate (orse than death since it ro*s
(omen of these LvirtuesM and casts a sti2ma over victims for the rest of their lives. In these
ima2inations, rape is not a crime a2ainst a (oman>s seCual autonom, or *odil, inte2rit,, *ut
an irrepara*le loss to her chastit,, Lmodest,,M and social standin2. - (oman (ho has alread,
LlostM her chastit, and modest, *, havin2 seCual relations *efore or outside of marria2e, is
not considered to have suffered too much harm5 and the perpetrator is therefore not reEuired
to *e punished too severel,. In order to ensure that such stereot,pical notions relatin2 to the
seCual *ehaviour and seCual mores of (omen are not considered in rape trials, the Indian
;vidence -ct (as amended in 2003, prohi*itin2 the defence from impeachin2 a rape victim>s
testimon, on the *asis of her past seCual histor,. 6nfortunatel,, the amendment appears to
have impacted onl, the 2uilt determination phase of the trial, and not the sentencin2 phase.
=he site of stereot,pin2 has merel, shifted from the 2uilt determination phase to the
sentencin2 phase of the trial, and stereot,pes have an adverse impact on rape sentencin2. In
cases (here the (oman>s *ehaviour does not adhere to stereot,pical constructs, the men (ho
raped them end up 2ettin2 lo(er sentences.

15
T'&s t'e p&n)s',ent %$( t')s -(),e s'$&l! 9e st()-t as t'e =$,en )s 'a(,e! %$( 'e( l)%e
as state! )n t'e s&p(e,e -$&(t -ase a9$7e. T'&s t'e st()-test p&n)s',ent s'$&l! 9e 2)7en
t$ t'e a--&se! as t')s =$&l! sen! a ,essa2e t$ t'e s$-)et0 t'at t'e(e )s @e($ t$le(an-e %$(
s&-' 'e)n$&s a-ts an! t'&s =e a(e !e,an!)n2 l)%e ),p()s$n,ent %$( B'a=a(lal an! t'e
st()-test p&n)s',ents %$( all t'e $t'e( a--&se!.
VII) I% len)en-0 )s s'$=n t$ (ape -$n7)-ts t')s =)ll pass a =($n2 ,essa2e t$ t'e s$-)et0
.ape is a crime, (hich has a devastatin2 effect on the survivors5 it has *een descri*ed as a
L*e2innin2 of a ni2htmareM. =he after shoc+s include depression, fear, 2uiltDcompleC,
suicidalDaction, and diminished seCual interest. etc., Lone *ecomes afraid ofKNN..(rites a
victim, Lhalf the human raceM. .eferrin2 to the pitia*le condition of (omen in societ, #r.
?ustice S. -hmad o*served that Lunfortunatel,, a (oman in our countr,, *elon2s to a class or
2roup of societ, (ho are in a disadvanta2ed position on account of several social *arriers and
impediments and have therefore, *een victims of t,rann, at the hands of men (ith (hom
the,, unfortunatel,, under the onstitution Len0o,, eEual statusM. L<omen also have the ri2ht
to life and li*ert,5 the, also have the ri2ht to *e respected and treated as eEual citi3ens. =heir
honour and di2nit, cannot *e touched or violated. =he, also have the ri2ht to lead an
honora*le and peaceful life. (7r. #u+esh 8adav, -ssoc. Professor, 7ept. of 9orensic
#edicine) #.#. Institute of #edical Sciences : .esearch
In State of /arnata+a v. .a0u, -I. 200' S 322!, this ourt dealt (ith a case of (ape of a
minor 2irl *elo( "2 0ea(s of a2e, (herein the Hi2h ourt reduced the sentence of the
accused from seven 0ea(s to three and a half 0ea(s. =his ourt held that the normal sentence
in a case (here (ape is committed on a child *elo( "2 0ea(s of a2e, is not less than "0 0ea(sK
ri2orous imprisonment, thou2h in eCceptional cases Lfor special and adeEuate reasonsM
sentence of less than "0 0ea(sK ri2orous imprisonment can also *e a(arded. =he ourt
o*served that socioDeconomic status, reli2ion, race, caste or creed of the accused or the victim
are irrelevant
22. =he ourt further too+ note that a(ardin2 punishment lesser than the ,)n),&, sentence
of4 0ea(s (as permissi*le onl, for adeEuate and special reasons. Ho(ever, no such reasons
have *een recorded *, the court for doin2 so, and thus, the court failed to ensure compliance
16
of such mandator, reEuirement *ut a(arded the punishment lesser than
the ,)n),&, prescri*ed under the IP. Such an order is violative of the mandator,
reEuirement of la( and has defeated the le2islative mandate. 7ecidin2 the case in such a
casual manner reduces the criminal 0ustice deliver, s,stem
=he 1ational Polic, of empo(erment of <omen States thatBD
-ll forms of violence a2ainst (omen, ph,sical and mental, (hether at domestic or societal
levels, includin2 those arisin2 from customs, traditions or accepted practices shall *e dealt
(ith effectivel, (ith a vie( to eliminate its incidence. Institutions and mechanismsIschemes
for assistance (ill *e created and stren2thened for prevention of such violence , includin2
seCual harassment at (or+ place and customs li+e do(r,5 for the reha*ilitation of the victims
of violence and for ta+in2 effective action a2ainst the perpetrators of such violence. - special
emphasis (ill also *e laid on pro2rammes and measures to deal (ith traffic+in2 in (omen
and 2irls.
6nder -rticle "! (3) of the constitution the State has *een empo(ered to ma+e special
provisions for (omen.
-rticle "4 and "!(3) pla, pivotal role in attainin2 eEual ri2hts for (omen alon2 (ith a *etter
protection as in other *ranches of la(.
=he onstitutional mandate of eEualit, of seCes and special protection provided under -rticle
"!(3) (as enforced *, the Supreme ourt in the cases of
-ir India v. 1ar2esh #eer3a "%8"(4) S 33!5 -I. "%8" S "82%
#uthamma v. 6nion of India "%'% -I. "8&8, "%80 S. (") &&8
17
4) P(a0e(
In li2ht of the aforesaid, it is hum*l, pra,ed *efore this Hon>*le ourt that the impu2ned
0ud2ment dated 20I0!I20"3 of =he Hon>*le Hi2h ourt of ?udicature for .a0asthan at ?aipur
Bench is unreasona*le and un0ust. It is totall, disproportionate to the heinousness of the
crime. It is hum*l, reEuested to =he Hon>*le Supreme ourt to reinstate the 0ud2ment of the
ourt of Sessions ?aipur dated 30I"2I20"0
18