Get this: A man forces a woman into oral or anal sex, it is apparently NOT rape, and instead of section 375: Sexual Offence, for which the punishment is a minimum of seven years, the man is charged under section 354: Assault or criminal force on a woman with intent to outrage her modesty (for which the punishment is a minimum of two years only)
Pretty wooly over what modesty actually means.
The IPC is very clean. Rape is explained as penetration, but it is taken to mean that the penetration is by the penis only to the vagina.
For example, in the Major singh, AIR 1967 SC 63 case, whee the accused walked into the room where a female child of seven and a half months was sleeping and committed an indecent assault (guess what this means, it not 'rape' according to the Indian law, but penetration nonetheless as any normal person would understand it), he was held to have committed an offence under this section (354) as he had outraged and intended to outrage whatever modesty (how extremely sickening)the little victim was capable of. Read between the lines, no wonder that the law books shy away from saying it clearly. Therefore, anal or oral penetration by force is NOT rape, and in fact, not penetration at all!
In a judgment (which I might be able to get my hands on) sakshi versus Union of India, a public interest litigation, a sexual offence was charged under 354 (Assault or criminal force on a woman with intent to outrage her modesty : 2 years)
, and not under 375, (rape : seven years), so as to (to quote the judgment) 'not confuse the public'.
No idea why they have a separate section. Apparently, forceful vaginal penetration is more of an offence, and more outrageous to the modesty than forceful anal or oral penetration.
3 comments:
Looking for bargains in dollar-store shares
Last year, Wall Street analysts looked up to see cheap "dollar'' stores in every retail haunt in ... Greg Sukenik, who follows real estate investment trusts, likes Host Marriott (HMT) for strong earnings, a higher dividend and assets in cities where there is little new supply.
I just came across your blog while surfing, Nice! If you are interested in Public Auto Auctions you should visit this related site ##KEYWORD# You may find it of interest.
they should perform anal sex on the guy who wrote these laws out and ask them whether they felt they were raped or their modesty outraged...
Also after reading this I realised for obvious reasons that there is no way a man can file for rape...
I am gonna go back and read what the true meaning of that word is..
Lawyers and loopholes..
for tampering with kids...they should have a death penalty..no matter what....
Hang that bast^&d major..i say castrate him and the judge who doled the sentence out..
and yes the lawyer who fought for the guy.....
wait till I blog the Judge's entire judgement. Goes all around the world, and then says that forced anal penetration is not rape, so as not to confuse the public. In fact, the problem is that once the act of rape is committed, you can be charged under various sections, and almost always the punishment isn't too harsh, because the lawyer can argue that the charge dhould be filed under a section with lesser punishment. Not only are the laws flawed, but the lawkeepers too... pathetic situation.
Post a Comment