No one has licence to violate woman’s body: Orissa High Court upholds man’s conviction in rape case

Orissa High Court observed that no evidence was produced from the convict on the allegations over the character of the rape survivor.

4 min readNew DelhiJan 27, 2026 03:00 PM IST

Orissa High Court dismissed the plea filed by the rape convict, who had challenged his conviction under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code

Orissa High Court dismissed the plea filed by the rape convict, who had challenged his conviction under Section 376 of the IPC. (Image generated using AI)

While rejecting the defence taken by a rape convict that the survivor was ‘accustomed to sexual intercourse’ and ‘a girl of easy virtue’, the Orissa High Court recently held that no one has any licence to violate a woman’s body, even assuming she were of “easy virtue”, as every woman is entitled to privacy and the right to live with dignity.

Justice R K Pattanaik dismissed the plea filed by the rape convict, who had challenged his conviction under Section 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code, affirming the findings of both the trial court and the appellate court.

Justice R K Pattanaik dismissed the revision plea filed by the rape convict.

Holding that the trial court had rightly rejected such a defence, the Orissa High Court held, “The law is well settled that even in the case of an unchaste women, who alleges sexual mischief, her evidence is not to be thrown away and in this regard, the decision of the Apex Court in State of Maharashtra and another v. Madhukar Narayan Mardikar is relevant, wherein, it has been observed that a woman of such character is entitled to privacy and no one can invade the same”.

Also Read | ‘Minor rape victim’s testimony credible, trustworthy’: Gujarat HC dismisses plea against conviction by accused

Background

The prosecution alleged that in June 1999 when the victim had gone to a nearby jungle to collect mushrooms she was picked-up by the accused and was allegedly raped.
Subsequently FIR was registered and a case under Section 376 of IPC was initiated.
The Assistant Sessions Judge, Bhanjanagar convicted the accused for the offence of rape and sentenced him to seven years of imprisonment.
The order of conviction and sentence was upheld by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhanjanagar.

Also Read | ‘Violative of bodily integrity’: Chhattisgarh High Court allows minor rape survivor to terminate 21-week pregnancy

Findings

It could be that the rape survivor was detained by the convict, who continued to commit such other mischief finally ending with the sexual intercourse spreading over a period of couple of hours and therefore, to claim that, it was improbable to indulgence in an act or rape for so long should not receive much attention.
Absence of any struggle during the act of rape is the basis to claim that her evidence is not trustworthy. It should not be forgotten that the survivor was aged about 16 and 17 years by then and the convict was a young man and was armed with a knife and for that, it was quite not possible for her to physically oppose him and challenge the sexual mischief.
An inconsistency in the evidence is a contradiction if it goes to the root of the case. If the surrounding circumstances with the evidence received unerringly suggests that the prosecution is able to prove the case, the court should accept the evidence as a whole and not to reject the same.
The defence also made an attempt to show that the survivor is accustomed to sexual intercourse and a girl of easy virtue. Such a plea of the defence was rejected by the courts below and rightly so.
No such evidence has been adduced from the side of defence on such a plea alleging her character.
None can have any license to violate a woman’s body even of easy virtue as she is entitled to her privacy and right to live with dignity and therefore, any such evidence regarding sexual mischief committed on her should not be disregarded or to be thrown overboard.
The said aspect has been taken cognizance of by the trial court and the conclusion is, therefore, absolutely correct and that too when, there has been no evidence to show that she was of loose character.
It was argued that two witnesses, parents of the victim, are interested in the outcome of the case and hence, their evidence should not be accepted without independent corroboration.
Even though they are the parents of the victim and of course interested witnesses, that by itself is not sufficient to discard their evidence.
The interested witnesses more often than not support the prosecution case but by no means, their evidence is to be doubted.

Ashish Shaji

Ashish Shaji is a Senior Sub-Editor at The Indian Express, where he specializes in legal journalism. Combining a formal education in law with years of editorial experience, Ashish provides authoritative coverage and nuanced analysis of court developments and landmark judicial decisions for a national audience. Expertise Legal Core Competency: Ashish is a law graduate (BA LLB) from IME Law College, CCSU. This academic foundation allows him to move beyond surface-level reporting, offering readers a deep-dive into the technicalities of statutes, case law, and legal precedents. Specialized Legal Reporting: His work at The Indian Express focuses on translating the often-dense proceedings of India's top courts into clear, actionable news. His expertise includes: Judicial Analysis: Breaking down complex orders from the Supreme Court and various High Courts. Legal Developments: Monitoring legislative changes and their practical implications for the public and the legal fraternity. Industry Experience: With over 5 years in the field, Ashish has contributed to several niche legal and professional platforms, honing his ability to communicate complex information. His previous experience includes: Lawsikho: Gaining insights into legal education and practical law. Verdictum: Focusing on high-quality legal news and court updates. Enterslice: Working at the intersection of legal, financial, and advisory services. ... Read More