February 28, 2024

Syllabus- General Studies 1(society)

Women empowerment and social justice: Policies for women Empowerment in India, Laws for protection of women, women security and safety initiatives in India.

Context

The recent judgment of a trial court acquitting a former editor of a news magazine, who was charged, in 2013, of having sexually assaulted an employee, a young woman journalist, during an event the newsmagazine had organised in Goa, has created a furor and raised many questions about the law.

  • However, the Goa government filed an appeal against the acquittal in the Goa Bench of the Bombay High Court requesting an immediate hearing.
  • The Solicitor General of India , during the hearing, said that the lower court’s judgment lacked sensitivity regarding crimes against women and awareness of the sections of criminal laws.

Recent Changes in Laws

In 2002, based on the recommendations of the 172nd report of the Law Commission of India, two major changes were made in the Evidence Act.

  1. The Act was amended to prohibit the defence counsel from asking questions to the prosecutrix in a rape case about her general character to impeach her credibility.
  2. The defence was not permitted to put questions to a witness in the cross-examination about the general immoral character of the prosecutrix and adduce evidence.

Various Aspects that need further consideration

Cross Examination of Victim

  • The Supreme Court of India has repeatedly said that the purpose of cross-examining a survivor of rape is not to humiliate her but to get to the truth of the case.
  • Therefore, questions about the past sexual life of the survivor should not have been permitted to be asked by the defence counsel as they violated the survivor’s right to a fair trial. The law does not permit the character assassination of a victim any more.

Conduct of Victim

  • The conduct of a survivor of sexual assault cannot be cast in a straitjacket formula. Every individual behaves differently under the given circumstances. It would be too stereotypical and patriarchal to expect a survivor to be seen traumatised all the time in front of everyone.
  • The Supreme Court, in Aparna Bhat and Ors. vs the State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.(2021) specifically said that courts should desist from expressing any stereotype opinion, in words spoken during proceedings, or in the course of a judicial order’ about women.
  • Stereotyping excludes any individualised consideration of a person’s actual circumstances and their abilities. It affects women’s right to a fair trial. Therefore, the judiciary must be careful not to create inflexible standards based on preconceived notions.

Omission and Contradiction

  • Every omission does not amount to a contradiction; omission which by necessary implication leads to conflicting versions between the statements made before the police and the court would amount to contradiction.
  • However, a victim is not expected to share the same graphic details of the sexual assault on her to every individual she meets or wishes to reveal the details to.
  • Therefore, if the statement given during the trial is substantially consistent with the statement given to the police and judicial magistrate during the investigation, the difference of details given to other individuals through email or otherwise in the form of written statements, cannot be rejected by terming them as untrustworthy.

Protection of identity of victim

The Indian Penal Code was amended in 1983 and disclosure of identity of the survivor of rape by anyone was made punishable under a newly added Section 228-A. The publication of name or any matter which may make known the identity of the survivor since then is thus prohibited.

  • The Supreme Court in State of Punjab vs Ramdev Singh(2003) held that the name of the victim should not be mentioned in the judgments, be it of that Court, High Court or lower court, and she should be described as ‘victim’ in the judgment. It therefore implies that anything such as the survivor’s husband’s name, her email address, etc which could reveal her identity, should not have been mentioned in the judgment. It is against the spirit of the law.

Sensitisation

It is true that the investigation must be unbiased, honest, just and in accordance with the law. The entire emphasis on a fair investigation has to be to bring out the truth of the case before the court.

Many amendments have been made in the criminal laws since 1983 with regard to crimes against women.The police must pull up their socks to improve investigation skills, and the application of the law should not elude justice due to a lack of proper sensitisation among other stakeholders in the criminal justice system.

 

Question- Ensuring safe working environment for women also includes unbiased investigation and delivery of justice in case of any harassment. Comment

Article- https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/an-acquittal-with-no-good-but-the-bad-and-the-ugly/article34825427.ece

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

© 2024 Civilstap Himachal Design & Development