Context of the Judgment
The Supreme Court’s 1979 judgment in the case of Tukaram versus State of Maharashtra, where it acquitted two policemen accused of raping a teenage tribal girl, was called "a moment of institutional embarrassment" by Chief Justice of India B. R. Gavai.
- The judgment failed to acknowledge the socio-economic and power dynamics at play in cases of sexual violence.
- It led to widespread protests and sparked the women's rights movement for stronger rape laws in India.
- Highlighted the need for stronger legal frameworks to protect against custodial rape and improve the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Impact and Legal Reforms
The Mathura rape case had far-reaching implications, leading to significant legal reforms in India:
- The Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1983 introduced custodial rape as a separate offence under Section 376 of the IPC.
- The amendment shifted the burden of proof in custodial rape cases from the rape survivor to the accused.
- The Vishaka guidelines were framed to address sexual harassment at the workplace following the gangrape of Bhanwari Devi.
Subsequent Legal Developments
- The 2013 Criminal Law Amendment Act, influenced by the Justice J.S. Verma Committee, expanded the definition of rape and stipulated that silence or a feeble no cannot imply consent.
- The age of consent was raised from 16 to 18 years.
- Death penalty was introduced for repeat offenders or if the rape resulted in the victim's death or persistent vegetative state.
- The Unnao and Kathua rape cases led to further amendments in 2018, making the laws more stringent and providing death penalty for rape of minors below 12 years, and a minimum of 20 years imprisonment for victims under 16.
Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2023
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) introduced further reforms in 2023:
- Made sexual offences gender-neutral for both victims and perpetrators.
- Gang rape of a woman below 18 years was made punishable with death or life imprisonment.
- Introduced new offences such as sexual intercourse under false pretences and broadened the definition of sexual harassment.
Public and Intellectual Response
A letter by intellectuals Upendra Baxi, Vasudha Dhagamwar, Raghunath Kelkar, and Lotika Sarkar criticized the 1979 judgment for its lack of condemnation of the police's actions and the failure to consider the victim's socio-economic background.
