Rapes in India: court verdicts - Revision history

Jyoti: /* Grabbing breasts, trying to disrobe girl not rape bid: HC, 2025 */

2026-03-28T13:15:32Z

‎Grabbing breasts, trying to disrobe girl not rape bid: HC, 2025

Jyoti: /* Loosening of woman’s pyjama strings */

2026-03-28T13:15:16Z

‎Loosening of woman’s pyjama strings

Jyoti: /* Grabbing breasts, trying to disrobe girl not rape bid: HC, 2025 */

2026-03-28T13:14:41Z

‎Grabbing breasts, trying to disrobe girl not rape bid: HC, 2025

Jyoti: /* Loosening of woman’s pyjama strings */

2026-03-28T13:14:08Z

‎Loosening of woman’s pyjama strings

Jyoti: /* Loosening of woman’s pyjama strings */

2026-03-28T13:13:28Z

‎Loosening of woman’s pyjama strings

Jyoti: /* Pushing breasts, trying opening shalwar's knot not rape attempt: HC, 2025 */

2026-03-28T13:11:34Z

‎Pushing breasts, trying opening shalwar's knot not rape attempt: HC, 2025

Jyoti: /* False allegations */

2025-05-06T12:09:05Z

‎False allegations

Jyoti: /* Definition(s) */

2025-04-08T07:59:57Z

‎Definition(s)

Pdewan: /* Disposal of rape cases by Indian courts */

2024-09-06T20:58:17Z

‎Disposal of rape cases by Indian courts

Show changes

Pdewan: /* Conviction rate */

2024-09-06T20:57:17Z

‎Conviction rate

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:15, 28 March 2026
Line 67:		Line 67:

	In their petition, the suspects had argued that even if the complainant’s version was “accepted at face value”, there was nothing in that account to label the offence as rape. Justice Mishra accepted their contention and ordered trial court to issue fresh summons for the duo’s trial, based on amended charges.		In their petition, the suspects had argued that even if the complainant’s version was “accepted at face value”, there was nothing in that account to label the offence as rape. Justice Mishra accepted their contention and ordered trial court to issue fresh summons for the duo’s trial, based on amended charges.
		+
		+	==Loosening of woman’s pyjama strings==
		+	[https://epaper.indiatimes.com/article-share?article=18_02_2026_011_017_cap_TOI Dhananjay.Mahapatra, February 18, 2026: ''The Times of India'']
		+
		+	New Delhi : Supreme Court ruled that groping a female and untying her pyjama string constituted “attempt to rape” and set aside Allahabad HC’s controversial judgment terming the offence not an “attempt” but “preparation to commit rape”, which attracts less punishment, being categorised as outraging the modesty of a woman.
		+
		+	The HC’s March 17, 2025, judgment had created a furore and SC took suo motu cognisance of the case after a letter from NGO ‘We the Women’ through founder president and senior advocate Shobha Gupta.
		+	A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and N V Anjaria set aside the HC judgment and revived the original stringent charge of attempt to rape against the two persons under Pocso Act.
		+
		+	Referring to pleas by Gupta and senior advocate H S Phoolka for greater sensitivity in judges while dealing with sexual offences against women, the bench said, “No judge or judgment of any court can be expected to do complete justice when it is inconsiderate towards the factual realities of a litigant and the vulnerabilities which they may be facing in approaching a court of law.”
		+
		+	Writing the judgment, CJI Kant said the efforts of judges “must not only be grounded in the sound application of constitutional and legal principles but also foster an environment of compassion and empathy. The absence of either of these cornerstones would prevent judicial institutions from properly performing their critical duties.”
		+
		+	The bench said, “Our decisions as participants in the legal process, from laying down the procedure that shall have to be faced by common citizens to the final judgment passed in any given case, must reflect the ethos of compassion, humanity and understanding, which are essential for creating a fair and effective justice system.”
		+
		+	SC said it had laid down principles to sensitise judges and so would refrain from taking an open-ended approach to devise fresh guidelines without guidance. It requested National Judicial Academy director Justice Aniruddha Bose to constitute a committee of experts to prepare a “comprehensive report” on ‘Developing Guidelines to Inculcate Sensitivity and Compassion into Judges and Judicial Processes in the Context of Sexual Offences and other Vulnerable Cases’.  “The guidelines, we expect, will not be loaded with heavy, complicated expressions borne from foreign languages and jurisdictions,” said the CJI-led bench, which had termed then CJI D Y Chandrachud’s‘Handbook on Combating gender Stereotypes’ too “Harvard-oriented”.

	[[Category:Crime\|RRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS		[[Category:Crime\|RRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS

@@ Line 37: / Line 37: @@
 =Attempt to rape=
-The HC’s March 17, 2025, judgment had created a furore and SC took suo motu cognisance of the case after a letter from NGO ‘We the Women’ through founder president and senior advocate Shobha Gupta.
+[[Category:Crime|RRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS
- A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and N V Anjaria set aside the HC judgment and revived the original stringent charge of attempt to rape against the two persons under Pocso Act.
+RAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS]]
+[[Category:India|RRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS
- Referring to pleas by Gupta and senior advocate H S Phoolka for greater sensitivity in judges while dealing with sexual offences against women, the bench said, “No judge or judgment of any court can be expected to do complete justice when it is inconsiderate towards the factual realities of a litigant and the vulnerabilities which they may be facing in approaching a court of law.”
+RAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS]]
+[[Category:Law,Constitution,Judiciary|RRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS
-Writing the judgment, CJI Kant said the efforts of judges “must not only be grounded in the sound application of constitutional and legal principles but also foster an environment of compassion and empathy. The absence of either of these cornerstones would prevent judicial institutions from properly performing their critical duties.”
+RAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS]]
+[[Category:Pages with broken file links|RAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS
- The bench said, “Our decisions as participants in the legal process, from laying down the procedure that shall have to be faced by common citizens to the final judgment passed in any given case, must reflect the ethos of compassion, humanity and understanding, which are essential for creating a fair and effective justice system.”
+RAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS]]
-−
- SC said it had laid down principles to sensitise judges and so would refrain from taking an open-ended approach to devise fresh guidelines without guidance. It requested National Judicial Academy director Justice Aniruddha Bose to constitute a committee of experts to prepare a “comprehensive report” on ‘Developing Guidelines to Inculcate Sensitivity and Compassion into Judges and Judicial Processes in the Context of Sexual Offences and other Vulnerable Cases’.  “The guidelines, we expect, will not be loaded with heavy, complicated expressions borne from foreign languages and jurisdictions,” said the CJI-led bench, which had termed then CJI D Y Chandrachud’s‘Handbook on Combating gender Stereotypes’ too “Harvard-oriented”.
 ==Grabbing breasts, trying to disrobe girl not rape bid: HC,  2025==

@@ Line 37: / Line 37: @@
 =Attempt to rape=
 ==Grabbing breasts, trying to disrobe girl not rape bid: HC,  2025==
 [https://epaper.indiatimes.com/article-share?article=21_03_2025_101_013_cap_TOI  March 21, 2025: ''The Times of India'']
@@ Line 56: / Line 72: @@
  In their petition, the suspects had argued that even if the complainant’s version was “accepted at face value”, there was nothing in that account to label the offence as rape. Justice Mishra accepted their contention and ordered trial court to issue fresh summons for the duo’s trial, based on amended charges.
 ==Pushing breasts, trying opening shalwar's knot not rape attempt: HC, 2025==

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:14, 28 March 2026
Line 77:		Line 77:
	The judge referred to a 1988 judgment of Madhya Pradesh HC that said that in order to amount to an attempt to rape, the accused must have proceeded beyond “preparation”.		The judge referred to a 1988 judgment of Madhya Pradesh HC that said that in order to amount to an attempt to rape, the accused must have proceeded beyond “preparation”.

−	~~===Loosening of woman’s pyjama strings===~~
−	~~[https://epaper.indiatimes.com/article-share?article=18_02_2026_011_017_cap_TOI Dhananjay.Mahapatra, February 18, 2026: ''The Times of India'']~~

−	New Delhi : Supreme Court ruled that groping a female and untying her pyjama string constituted “attempt to rape” and set aside Allahabad HC’s controversial judgment terming the offence not an “attempt” but “preparation to commit rape”, which attracts less punishment, being categorised as outraging the modesty of a woman.
−
−	The HC’s March 17, 2025, judgment had created a furore and SC took suo motu cognisance of the case after a letter from NGO ‘We the Women’ through founder president and senior advocate Shobha Gupta.
−	A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and N V Anjaria set aside the HC judgment and revived the original stringent charge of attempt to rape against the two persons under Pocso Act.
−
−	Referring to pleas by Gupta and senior advocate H S Phoolka for greater sensitivity in judges while dealing with sexual offences against women, the bench said, “No judge or judgment of any court can be expected to do complete justice when it is inconsiderate towards the factual realities of a litigant and the vulnerabilities which they may be facing in approaching a court of law.”
−
−	Writing the judgment, CJI Kant said the efforts of judges “must not only be grounded in the sound application of constitutional and legal principles but also foster an environment of compassion and empathy. The absence of either of these cornerstones would prevent judicial institutions from properly performing their critical duties.”
−
−	The bench said, “Our decisions as participants in the legal process, from laying down the procedure that shall have to be faced by common citizens to the final judgment passed in any given case, must reflect the ethos of compassion, humanity and understanding, which are essential for creating a fair and effective justice system.”
−
−	SC said it had laid down principles to sensitise judges and so would refrain from taking an open-ended approach to devise fresh guidelines without guidance. It requested National Judicial Academy director Justice Aniruddha Bose to constitute a committee of experts to prepare a “comprehensive report” on ‘Developing Guidelines to Inculcate Sensitivity and Compassion into Judges and Judicial Processes in the Context of Sexual Offences and other Vulnerable Cases’.  “The guidelines, we expect, will not be loaded with heavy, complicated expressions borne from foreign languages and jurisdictions,” said the CJI-led bench, which had termed then CJI D Y Chandrachud’s‘Handbook on Combating gender Stereotypes’ too “Harvard-oriented”.

	[[Category:Crime\|RRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS		[[Category:Crime\|RRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS

@@ Line 77: / Line 77: @@
  The judge referred to a 1988 judgment of Madhya Pradesh HC that said that in order to amount to an attempt to rape, the accused must have proceeded beyond “preparation”.
-==Loosening of woman’s pyjama strings==
+===Loosening of woman’s pyjama strings===
 [https://epaper.indiatimes.com/article-share?article=18_02_2026_011_017_cap_TOI  Dhananjay.Mahapatra, February 18, 2026: ''The Times of India'']

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:11, 28 March 2026
Line 76:		Line 76:

	The judge referred to a 1988 judgment of Madhya Pradesh HC that said that in order to amount to an attempt to rape, the accused must have proceeded beyond “preparation”.		The judge referred to a 1988 judgment of Madhya Pradesh HC that said that in order to amount to an attempt to rape, the accused must have proceeded beyond “preparation”.
		+
		+	==Loosening of woman’s pyjama strings==
		+	[https://epaper.indiatimes.com/article-share?article=18_02_2026_011_017_cap_TOI Dhananjay.Mahapatra, February 18, 2026: ''The Times of India'']
		+
		+	New Delhi : Supreme Court ruled that groping a female and untying her pyjama string constituted “attempt to rape” and set aside Allahabad HC’s controversial judgment terming the offence not an “attempt” but “preparation to commit rape”, which attracts less punishment, being categorised as outraging the modesty of a woman.
		+
		+	The HC’s March 17, 2025, judgment had created a furore and SC took suo motu cognisance of the case after a letter from NGO ‘We the Women’ through founder president and senior advocate Shobha Gupta.
		+	A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and N V Anjaria set aside the HC judgment and revived the original stringent charge of attempt to rape against the two persons under Pocso Act.
		+
		+	Referring to pleas by Gupta and senior advocate H S Phoolka for greater sensitivity in judges while dealing with sexual offences against women, the bench said, “No judge or judgment of any court can be expected to do complete justice when it is inconsiderate towards the factual realities of a litigant and the vulnerabilities which they may be facing in approaching a court of law.”
		+
		+	Writing the judgment, CJI Kant said the efforts of judges “must not only be grounded in the sound application of constitutional and legal principles but also foster an environment of compassion and empathy. The absence of either of these cornerstones would prevent judicial institutions from properly performing their critical duties.”
		+
		+	The bench said, “Our decisions as participants in the legal process, from laying down the procedure that shall have to be faced by common citizens to the final judgment passed in any given case, must reflect the ethos of compassion, humanity and understanding, which are essential for creating a fair and effective justice system.”
		+
		+	SC said it had laid down principles to sensitise judges and so would refrain from taking an open-ended approach to devise fresh guidelines without guidance. It requested National Judicial Academy director Justice Aniruddha Bose to constitute a committee of experts to prepare a “comprehensive report” on ‘Developing Guidelines to Inculcate Sensitivity and Compassion into Judges and Judicial Processes in the Context of Sexual Offences and other Vulnerable Cases’.  “The guidelines, we expect, will not be loaded with heavy, complicated expressions borne from foreign languages and jurisdictions,” said the CJI-led bench, which had termed then CJI D Y Chandrachud’s‘Handbook on Combating gender Stereotypes’ too “Harvard-oriented”.

	[[Category:Crime\|RRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS		[[Category:Crime\|RRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:09, 6 May 2025
Line 574:		Line 574:

	“If a witness becomes hostile to subvert the judicial process, the court shall not stand as a mute spectator and every effort should be made to bring home the truth. Criminal justice system cannot be overturned by those gullible witnesses who act under pressure, inducement or intimidation,” the bench said.		“If a witness becomes hostile to subvert the judicial process, the court shall not stand as a mute spectator and every effort should be made to bring home the truth. Criminal justice system cannot be overturned by those gullible witnesses who act under pressure, inducement or intimidation,” the bench said.
		+
		+	=Gang rape=
		+	==Rape by one of a gang makes others responsible, equally punishable: SC==
		+	[https://epaper.indiatimes.com/article-share?article=05_05_2025_001_023_cap_TOI May 5, 2025: ''The Times of India'']
		+
		+
		+	New Delhi : Holding that it is not necessary for the prosecution to adduce clinching proof of complete act of rape by each one of the accused to convict all for gang rape, Supreme Court has reiterated that in cases of gang rape, even if one commits rape, all the other persons involved should be held responsible and be equally punished.
		+
		+	A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and K V Viswanathan rejected the plea of an accused who claimed that he was not named along with other accused by the survivor in the FIR and his role was confined to helping the main accused.
		+
		+	Rejecting the plea, the bench said, “In a case of gang rape under Section 376(2)(g), an act by one is enough to render all in the gang for punishment as long as they have acted in furtherance of the common intention. Further, common intention is implicit in the charge of Section 376(2)(g) itself and all that is needed is evidence to show the existence of common intention.”
		+
		+	Referring to earlier SC verdicts, the bench said in order to establish an offence under Section 376(2)(g) IPC, the prosecution must adduce evidence to indicate that more than one accused had acted in concert and in such an event, if rape had been committed by even one, all the accused would be guilty irrespective of the fact that the woman had been raped by one or more of them and it was not necessary for the prosecution to adduce evidence of a completed act of rape by each one of the accused.
		+
		+
		+	''' Common intention is essence of joint liability: SC '''
		+
		+	In other words, this provision embodies a principle of joint liability and the essence of that liability is the existence of common intention; that common intention presupposes prior concert which may be determined from the conduct of offenders revealed during the course of action and it could arise and be formed suddenly, but there must be meeting of minds and it is not enough to have the same intention independently of each of the offenders,” it said.
		+
		+	[[Category:Crime\|RRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS
		+	RAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS]]
		+	[[Category:India\|RRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS
		+	RAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS]]
		+	[[Category:Law,Constitution,Judiciary\|RRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS
		+	RAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS]]
		+	[[Category:Pages with broken file links\|RAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS
		+	RAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS]]

	=Identity of survivor=		=Identity of survivor=

@@ Line 412: / Line 412: @@
 RAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS]]
-'''Rape conviction rate at 5-yr low'''
+[[Category:Crime|RRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTSRAPES IN INDIA: COURT VERDICTS
 =Disposal of rape cases by Indian courts=
 == Rape sentences are influenced by 3 beliefs==