Damning the violated

Twenty years ago, the Supreme Court acquitted two policemen from Maharashtra for raping a young tribal woman in a police station. The case, better known as the Mathura rape case, led to a storm of protest and serious attempts to redefine, or at least clarify, concepts like 8220;consent8221; and 8220;custodial rape8221;. The case proved how difficult it was to ensure that justice is done in a crime like rape, which occurs largely in the private sphere and has serious social consequences for the violated person. Thursday8217;s Supreme Court judgment, acquitting two teachers of Bengaon, Maharashtra, of raping their colleague six years ago, therefore, evoked a strong sense of deja vu. Twenty years may have gone by, but the inadequacies of the country8217;s criminal justice system in addressing crimes like rape are patently obvious.

The justices, in their recent verdict, were convinced that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the appellants 8220;beyond reasonable doubt8221;. That the raped woman had chosen not to inform her parents about the incident and had delayed lodging an FIR for 10 days after it had occurred were factors that seemed to have weighed heavily on their minds. Yet, given the social odium attached to a crime of this kind 8212; in this case, the raped woman chose to commit suicide five months later, evidently unable to bear the stigma 8212; such a pattern of behaviour may not be considered unusual. Interestingly, both the trial court and the Bombay High Court had chosen to discount these factors in their own judgments and preferred to go by the circumstantial evidence presented to them, as well as eye-witness accounts and medical reports. Be this as it may, there is no getting away from the fact that crucial evidence of the crime was indeed lost because of the delay in lodging the FIR and the Supreme Court judgespreferred to go strictly by the evidence at hand. It is this aspect of the case that demands the utmost introspection from law enforcers, social activists and, indeed, society at large.

The conviction rate in rape cases, most of which are not reported at all, is abysmally low precisely because the necessary investigations are not conducted with any degree of accuracy. One of the factors is, of course, ignorance. The violated woman is unaware of the crucial importance attached to the FIR and the medical examination in such cases. Her hesitation in coming forward with her complaint is often buttressed by the apathy and lack of sensitivity the local police and medical authorities display in dealing with her case. Precious time and valuable evidence is lost in the process and the violator invariably goes unpunished. Some months ago, the Union home minister had suggested that rapists be awarded the death penalty. But, as was pointed out then, it is not the severity of the punishment that ensures that justice is done, but the surety of it. The latest judgment provides sufficient indication that the system is still largely unable to ensure that a rapist does, indeed, get his just desserts.