* SC 'redefines' rape Legal Correspondent* New Delhi, March 20 Tightening the law further against perpetrators of crimes against women, the supreme court has ruled that for the offence of rape mere connection of male's private part with that of a woman is sufficient and there is no defence available to the offender that the sexual intercourse has not actually been completed.
"The definition of rape as contained in section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) refers to sexual intercourse. Intercourse means sexual connection," a bench of Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice S.H. Kapadia held, laying down that only such sexual connection of a man with the woman had to be clearly established for constituting the offence of rape. In connection with this, the court also tightened the definition of the offence of "outraging the modesty" of a woman under section 354 of the IPC. It said a mere knowledge by her that her "modesty is likely to be outraged, is sufficient to constitute the offence without any deliberate intention having such outrage alone for its object." The court said since the offence under section 354 could lead to the offence of rape, the trial courts while deciding such cases had to take into account the connection between intention to commit the offence and attempt made to commit it. An attempt to commit an offence could be said to begin when the preparations were completed by a culprit and he commences to do something with the intention of committing it. "The moment he commences to do an act with the necessary intention, he commences his attempt to commit it," the court said. "This is exactly what the provision of section 511 (defining attempt) requires… an attempt to commit a crime is to be distinguished from an intention to commit it. Mere intention to commit an offence, not followed by any action, cannot constitute an offence," the court said. Elaborating further, it said the dividing line between a preparation to commit an offence and an attempt to commit it sometimes was very thin and had to be decided on the fact of each case. "There is a greater degree of determination in attempt as compared with the preparation."The judgement came on an appeal of rape convict Ramkripal from Satna in Madhya Pradesh, whose counsel took the defence that he could not be held guilty of rape because the act of sexual intercourse with the woman he assaulted was not complete. His lawyer had said at the most his client could be charged for outraging the modesty of the victim as he had left her in the midway of the act as she had put up a strong resistance. The sessions court had convicted him for rape and the verdict was upheld by the Jabalpur bench of the MP high court. Dismissing the appeal, the apex court came to the conclusion that in the instant case the "sexual connection" of the accused with her had been clearly established, and therefore, both trial court and high court were "perfectly justified in their view." http://www.tribuneindia.com/2007/20070321/nation.htm#4
