WWW.LIVELAW.

IN

and of the individual circumstances of the offenders, 'a convict will be

subject to stringent punishment.

It is submitted that, on account of lack of gradation of offences, and

due to the la'w as it stands, minors who indulge in consensual sexual

intercourse shall be the worst affected by the present law. The absence of

a close-in-age exception in Indian law means that an eighteen year—old

boy who engages in consensual sexual intercourse with a fifteen year-old

girl may be sentenced at minimum to twenty years imprisonment if

convicted. Further, the effect of the amended Juvenile Justice Act, 2015,

which allows minors to be tried as adults in certain circumstances, means

that even a person below the age of 18 could be subjected to severe

punishment for consensual sexual intercourse.

The present ordinance is marred by another glaring illegality which

is that it envisages a mandatory notice to the public prosecutor "within 15

days" before bail can be granted to a person accused of rape. It is

submitted that this stipulation could amount to imposition of a de-facto

punishment of 15 days before conviction, on any person accused of

committingi rape and therefore, the same is violative of Article 14 and

Article 21. The said amendment, contained in Section 22(a) of the

Ordinance, is vague to the point that the meaning and intention of the

legislature cannot be discerned from the language therein.

The Ordinance also mandates in Section 22(b) that the informant

or a.person authorized by the informant be present at the time of hearing

of the application for bail preferred by a person accused of committing

rape / gang rape upon a woman below 16 years of age. Rather than

Scanned with CamScanner

 „ , ,, , .. ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, w" ,w rA r . w . .f t r am e .w .w .e m• w ri w w .d . 9 wrA ! )~4eghil0, 1 ~ 14 4 0 . 6 0 . 4 2 ', W a r at: Ma ti 44 =I SAM IN IN AC OL AS O

WWW.L1VELAW.1N

ameliorating hardship, the said provision is likely to place an undue burden

on a vulnerable victim and / or their family, while absolving the State of their

responsibility to ensure adequate and effective prosecution of the cases.

It is submitted that various absurdities which arise in the

application of the law mandate a reconsideration of its validity, and the

Ordinance clearly flouts Article 14, 21 of the Constitution.

LIST OF DATES
ti

DATE PARTICULARS
June, 1971 The Law Commission published its 4?' Report whereby

it elaborately considered the various amendments to the Indian

Penal Code and recommended against imposition of a

mandatory minimum sentence in the case of rape.

25.01.201 The report of Justice J.S. Verma Committee on

Amendments to Criminal Law was published which did

•
not favour imposition of death sentence for the offence of
rape by noting that

"24. In our considered view, taking into account the

views expressed on the subject by an
overwhelming majority of scholars, leaders of
women's' organisations, and other stakeholders, there is
a strong submission that the seeking of death penalty
would be a regressive step in the field of sentencing
and reformation. We, having bestowed considerable
thought on the subject, and having provided for
enhanced sentences (short ofdeath) in respect of the
above-noted aggravated forms of sexual assault, in the
larger interests of society, and having regard to the
current thinking in favour of abolition of the death
penalty, and also

Scanned with CamScanner