Rape Case IPC

Rape Case 

The issue of rape is an incredibly sensitive and distressing subject that affects countless individuals around the world. In many jurisdictions, including India, the legal framework for addressing rape cases is governed by the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Understanding the intricacies of the IPC provisions related to rape is essential for comprehending the legal processes, the rights of victims, and the implications for survivors and perpetrators. 

Acts done against her will

Himachal Pradesh v. Mango Ram (2000)

In this instance, the position of Prosecutrix was held by Jagia Ram, the oldest daughter. The prosecutrix was accompanied by the accused, who was 17 years old at the time. The accused person took her by surprise from behind, forced her to lie down on the ground, and then engaged in sexual activity with her while she was there. The Supreme Court concluded that the girl put up some form of resistance in an effort to prevent the accused from completing the act, but the accused was able to overpower her. Because the act was carried out against the victim's will, the accused was found guilty of the crime of rape.

Act committed against the Woman's consent

In accordance with the provisions of Section 375(2), the crime of rape can be defined as any act of sexual intercourse that is carried out against the will of the woman. If the consent is not freely given, the other party may be able to hold the first party accountable for illegal activity. The most recent reform, which took effect in 2013, stipulated that the court must presume that women are telling the truth when they assert that there was no consent given during a sexual encounter.

Queen vs flattery (1877)

In this instance, the girl was in poor health and had gone to the clinic the accused ran. There, she was given the recommendation to undergo a surgical procedure, which she accepted, and while the accused was doing the procedure, she had sexual relations with the accused. The court determined that the permission given was not legal and had been obtained via misunderstanding. Therefore, the accused is responsible for the crime of rape.

Non-Valid Consent 

Consent gained Through Misrepresentation, Fraud, or error: If consent is gained through misrepresentation, fraud, or error while engaging in sexual activity with a woman, that consent will not be considered legitimate, and the accused can still be held guilty for the crime of rape. This occurs during the time that the accused is having sexual activity with the woman.

Bhupender Singh v. Union Territory of Chandigarh (2008)

In this particular case, the accused engaged in sexual activity with the prosecutrix, which led to the latter becoming pregnant; nevertheless, she ultimately decided to terminate the pregnancy. They did it again and had sexual encounters. The accused made a vow to her that he would marry her again once she gave birth to their child, and he kept his word. After some time had passed, she learned that the accused was already married and had children, and when confronted, the accused failed to fulfil his commitment to her. She initiated legal action against the defendant. The court decided that the accused engaged in sexual activity with the victim while acting fraudulently; hence, the victim's permission cannot be considered legitimate, and the accused was found guilty of violating Section 375 of the Criminal Code.

Consent obtained when the woman is intoxicated or unsound mind

It is impossible to have legal standing for permission that was given when the person was in a condition of intoxication and unsoundness.

Tulsidas Kanolkar vs State of Goa (2003)

The girl's mental capacity to grant consent for sexual activity was inadequate in this case. The defendant asserted lawful consent as an affirmative defence. After finding the defendant guilty, the additional session judge sentenced him to 10 years in jail and a fine of $10,000. The High Court lowered the sentence from 14 to 7 years. Ultimately, the Supreme Court decided against the appeal since no actual consent was involved.

Consent obtained by putting the fear of death 

It is not genuine consent if a woman gives her permission to do anything when her children, parents, spouse, etc., are in mortal danger.

State of Maharashtra vs Prakash (1992)

The victim permitted sexual intercourse after she learned that a police officer and a businessman had placed her spouse under custody. The court ruled that the women's consent was not genuine since the ladies were putting the person of her interest in danger. As a result, they bore responsibility for the crime. In the case of a woman who cannot provide her consent, it would be a crime for a male to engage in sexual activity with her. For instance, suppose A and B had sex while B is under the impression that A is pregnant. Later, if A says she did not give her permission, B could be charged with rape.