The Times of India reported the trials & sentencing in rape cases is based on myths perpetrated since a long time. The said article stated that a new study was done by associate professor, Mrinal Satish .The study indicates that punishments in rape cases are based on unscientific evidence which have little or no basis in facts.
The study says that it is believed that if the doctor is able to do the two finger test ( TFT ) with the victim, that is an indication that victim has suffered less .And so ,the accused is given a feeble punishment .And in case, the doctor is unable to perform the two finger test, it is concluded that victim is virgin & not habituated to intercourse. Accordingly , the accused is punished harshly.This is outrageous. as the two finger test has been denounced time & again as being totally inadequate for sexual assault cases. The Supreme Court has stated that TFT violates the privacy of rape victims. The TFT is based on the myth that hymen is flexible if woman is accustomed to sexual intercourse & is tight if not so habituated. And yet, hymen can get torn due to activities like swimming, cycling etc. Moreover, WHO has declared that TFT is outdated to determine sexual assault. And yet, Indian courts continue to be guided by this archaic test. And the courts should note that they are going against precedent set by the Supreme Court which has held that TFT offends the dignity of the victims of rape.
In rape cases,. the onus is on the perpetrator to show that he did not commit rape.And yet, courts rely on medical jurisprudence textbooks which perpetrate patriarchy by relying on unscientific & invasive tests on the victim .The manner in which the rape cases are conducted makes a mockery of justice.It is like the victim is on trial .Her character is supposed to be gauged from her sexual history, her way of dressing , her way of conduct , her social standing , her race, caste etal. As against this, the perpetrator is never judged on his character or caste, race etc. It is implied that men will be men & sexual assault, stalking, etc are second nature to them or perhaps an inherent, inborn , innate tendency .This tendency has been allowed to grow sorry nurtured, so much, that it has become a menace.
The trauma of rape is enough & proving it in court is like a series of sexual assaults on the victim though in- camera. This deters many victims from filing complaints & going through the rigmarole of the judicial process . And yet, the danger of perpetrators not being brought to justice is too evident. Such perpetrators would get bolder & assault many more .And lawlessness would prevail more than ever before.
Mrinal Satish 's next finding is that consent is implied if victim shows no physical injuries. This is another fallacy ,as a victim can be bullied by menacing threats which affect the victim mentally.Will a drugged woman or girl resist rape ? What about a woman, who has had a few drinks willingly or unwillingly & is then subjected to rape ? What about her consent ? Is her silence because she is under the influence of drinks amount to consent or silence in such cases is a negation of consent .Similarly, physically & mentally regarded females have been raped & they are unable to resist That's why no physical injuries are visible.Yet, can it by any stretch of imagination be said that there was no rape ? Rape is an act of power play. And when there is no consent, obviously it is an assault. And as it involves sex against and or without consent, it is rape. And yet, sentences have been less harsh when physical injuries were absent & more when physical injuries were evident.Physical injuries are taken as proof that the victim resisted while absence of physical injuries is meant to be taken as consent .And this may be completely wrong &.This has lead to acquittal in many cases of rape.
Yet another myth in rape cases ( as determined by the aforesaid study ) is that if victim knew the accused, it is understood that both were attracted towards each other. And it was a an act of passion. This seems very much like Hindi films wheres stalking the heroine is the way to make her fall in line.What is consent anyway ? And whose consent ? The accused consented .Enough said. Such patriarchy prevails in our nation that the wheels of justice move slower and slower that is ,if they move at all.
And the as per National Crime Record Bureau,in 2015, in 95 .5% rape cases, the accused were known to the victims. Does the pain, shame & trauma lessen in case, victim knows the accused ? On the contrary, in such cases, it is a violation of trust .And yet , courts have awarded higher punishment in cases, rapes were committed by strangers. This means only in 4.5 % cases were culprits given harsher sentences. The aim of punishment is to deter others from committing similar crimes. If punishments are feeble , the message being sent across is that rape is fine , if victim is known.Hence, choose known persons & assault them sexually .And punishment will be less or maybe if victim is too ashamed to admit rape happened, the perpetrator can get away scot free ! And taking cues from courts, cops will tell the victims to settle matter amicably as it is "Ghar ki baat ".
The study concludes that medical jurisprudence books are referred too often to bring in evidence such as hymen elasticity, chastity, presence, absence of injuries etc to verify the victim's complaint. Yet, rape as an an offence only talks about penetration & consent under section 375 of the Indian Penal Code. Though , the Justice Verma Commission report has broadened the definition of rape making it more inclusive, the tests in courts still rely on medical books to corroborate evidence about the woman's testimony.This is shocking & deplorable. Medical jurisprudence books need to be total rehauled to match the current scenario.Only those medical tests must be admitted as evidence which can be scientifically proved & are relevant legally.Then only can victims expect justice. Patriarchal attitudes about chastity of women needs to give way.
Both the law & administration need to be sensitized to deal with rape cases.Then only can some headway be made in dealing with cases of sexual assault .Only then, will women in India feel safe as also secure.
The study says that it is believed that if the doctor is able to do the two finger test ( TFT ) with the victim, that is an indication that victim has suffered less .And so ,the accused is given a feeble punishment .And in case, the doctor is unable to perform the two finger test, it is concluded that victim is virgin & not habituated to intercourse. Accordingly , the accused is punished harshly.This is outrageous. as the two finger test has been denounced time & again as being totally inadequate for sexual assault cases. The Supreme Court has stated that TFT violates the privacy of rape victims. The TFT is based on the myth that hymen is flexible if woman is accustomed to sexual intercourse & is tight if not so habituated. And yet, hymen can get torn due to activities like swimming, cycling etc. Moreover, WHO has declared that TFT is outdated to determine sexual assault. And yet, Indian courts continue to be guided by this archaic test. And the courts should note that they are going against precedent set by the Supreme Court which has held that TFT offends the dignity of the victims of rape.
In rape cases,. the onus is on the perpetrator to show that he did not commit rape.And yet, courts rely on medical jurisprudence textbooks which perpetrate patriarchy by relying on unscientific & invasive tests on the victim .The manner in which the rape cases are conducted makes a mockery of justice.It is like the victim is on trial .Her character is supposed to be gauged from her sexual history, her way of dressing , her way of conduct , her social standing , her race, caste etal. As against this, the perpetrator is never judged on his character or caste, race etc. It is implied that men will be men & sexual assault, stalking, etc are second nature to them or perhaps an inherent, inborn , innate tendency .This tendency has been allowed to grow sorry nurtured, so much, that it has become a menace.
The trauma of rape is enough & proving it in court is like a series of sexual assaults on the victim though in- camera. This deters many victims from filing complaints & going through the rigmarole of the judicial process . And yet, the danger of perpetrators not being brought to justice is too evident. Such perpetrators would get bolder & assault many more .And lawlessness would prevail more than ever before.
Mrinal Satish 's next finding is that consent is implied if victim shows no physical injuries. This is another fallacy ,as a victim can be bullied by menacing threats which affect the victim mentally.Will a drugged woman or girl resist rape ? What about a woman, who has had a few drinks willingly or unwillingly & is then subjected to rape ? What about her consent ? Is her silence because she is under the influence of drinks amount to consent or silence in such cases is a negation of consent .Similarly, physically & mentally regarded females have been raped & they are unable to resist That's why no physical injuries are visible.Yet, can it by any stretch of imagination be said that there was no rape ? Rape is an act of power play. And when there is no consent, obviously it is an assault. And as it involves sex against and or without consent, it is rape. And yet, sentences have been less harsh when physical injuries were absent & more when physical injuries were evident.Physical injuries are taken as proof that the victim resisted while absence of physical injuries is meant to be taken as consent .And this may be completely wrong &.This has lead to acquittal in many cases of rape.
Yet another myth in rape cases ( as determined by the aforesaid study ) is that if victim knew the accused, it is understood that both were attracted towards each other. And it was a an act of passion. This seems very much like Hindi films wheres stalking the heroine is the way to make her fall in line.What is consent anyway ? And whose consent ? The accused consented .Enough said. Such patriarchy prevails in our nation that the wheels of justice move slower and slower that is ,if they move at all.
And the as per National Crime Record Bureau,in 2015, in 95 .5% rape cases, the accused were known to the victims. Does the pain, shame & trauma lessen in case, victim knows the accused ? On the contrary, in such cases, it is a violation of trust .And yet , courts have awarded higher punishment in cases, rapes were committed by strangers. This means only in 4.5 % cases were culprits given harsher sentences. The aim of punishment is to deter others from committing similar crimes. If punishments are feeble , the message being sent across is that rape is fine , if victim is known.Hence, choose known persons & assault them sexually .And punishment will be less or maybe if victim is too ashamed to admit rape happened, the perpetrator can get away scot free ! And taking cues from courts, cops will tell the victims to settle matter amicably as it is "Ghar ki baat ".
The study concludes that medical jurisprudence books are referred too often to bring in evidence such as hymen elasticity, chastity, presence, absence of injuries etc to verify the victim's complaint. Yet, rape as an an offence only talks about penetration & consent under section 375 of the Indian Penal Code. Though , the Justice Verma Commission report has broadened the definition of rape making it more inclusive, the tests in courts still rely on medical books to corroborate evidence about the woman's testimony.This is shocking & deplorable. Medical jurisprudence books need to be total rehauled to match the current scenario.Only those medical tests must be admitted as evidence which can be scientifically proved & are relevant legally.Then only can victims expect justice. Patriarchal attitudes about chastity of women needs to give way.
Both the law & administration need to be sensitized to deal with rape cases.Then only can some headway be made in dealing with cases of sexual assault .Only then, will women in India feel safe as also secure.
