CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness Employee Cannot Switch Cadre At His Sweet Will After Accepting Promotion: J&K High Court Rejects Claim For Retrospective Assistant Registrar Appointment Anticipatory Bail Cannot Expire With Charge-Sheet: Supreme Court Reiterates Liberty Is Not Bound by Procedural Milestones Order II Rule 2 Cannot Eclipse Amendment Power Under Order VI Rule 17: MP High Court Refuses to Stall Will-Based Title Suit Grounds of Arrest Must Be Personal, Not Formal – But Detailed Allegations Suffice: Kerala High Court Upholds Arrest in Sabarimala Gold Misappropriation Case Grounds of Arrest Are Not a Ritual – They Are a Constitutional Mandate Under Article 22(1): Allahabad High Court Sets Aside Arrest for Non-Supply of Written Grounds Sect. 25 NDPS | Mere Ownership Cannot Fasten NDPS Liability – ‘Knowingly Permits’ Must Be Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt: MP High Court Section 308 CrPC | Revocation of Pardon Is Not Automatic on Prosecutor’s Certificate: Karnataka High Court Joint Family and Ancestral Property Are Alien to Mohammedan Law: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Injunction Right to Health Cannot Wait for Endless Consultations: Supreme Court Pulls Up FSSAI Over Delay in Front-of-Pack Warning Labels If A Son Dies Intestate Leaving Wife And Children, The Mother Has No Share: Karnataka High Court

Rape Should Be Gender-Neutral Offence - Kerala HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


A woman cannot be prosecuted if she entices a man with a false promise of marriage. However, a man may be prosecuted for the same crime. It ought to be gender-neutral, remarked Justice A Muhamed Mustaque orally.When the issue of an old rape charge against the accused arose, his attorney argued that he is out on bail and that the case was built on unfounded allegations of sex under false promise to marry.

While doing so, the Court noted that, because the IPC does not contain a gender-neutral provision for rape, the court will have to consider the relative positions of the accused and the woman in terms of dominant subordinate roles.

Kerala High Court Observed that "It should be noted that the statutory provisions of the rape offence as defined in the Indian Penal Code are not gender-neutral. On the basis of a false promise to marry and have sexual relations with a man, with the man's consent obtained on the basis of such a false promise, a woman cannot be punished for rape. However, a man who falsely promises to marry a woman and then has a sexual relationship with her would be charged with rape by the prosecution. Therefore, the law creates the false assumption that the man is always in a position to dominate the woman's will. "Therefore, the understanding of consent must relate to the dominant and subordinate relationship in a sexual act.

Justice Mustaque has also advocated for the standardization of marriage and divorce laws across all religions and communities. This sentiment was eloquently expressed in a landmark decision allowing a woman to file for divorce on the basis of marital rape.

Occasionally, India's constitutional courts have been seized with petitions challenging gender exclusion in rape laws.

In 2017, the Delhi High Court issued a notice to the Central government in a public interest litigation (PIL) challenging the constitutional validity of Sections 375 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and requesting the formulation of gender-neutral rape provisions.

In 2019, the Central government defended the gender-specific rape law before the High Court, stating that the decision was made because the majority of sexual harassment victims in the country are female.

In 2018, the Criminal Justice Society of India filed a petition with the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code on the grounds that it is not gender-neutral and violates Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution because it does not account for rape of men and transgender individuals.

However, the Apex court declined to intervene.

Latest Legal News