JUSTICE VERMA COMMITTEE

NIRBHAYA CASE AND JUSTICE VERMA COMMITTEE’S RECOMMENDATIONS: A

LEGAL ANALYSIS

Background: On
December 23, 2012 a
three member
Committee headed by
Justice J.S. Verma,
former Chief Justice of
the Supreme Court, was
constituted to
recommend
amendments to the
Criminal Law so as to
provide for quicker trial
and enhanced
punishment for
criminals accused
of committing sexual
assault against women.
The other members on
the Committee were
Justice
Leila Seth, former
judge of the High Court
and Gopal
Subramanium, former
Solicitor General of
India.
A judicial committee
headed by Justice
Verma was appointed
by the central
government to
submit a report in 30
days regarding the
amendments and
suggestions relating to
reforms in laws
concerning sexual
violence against
women.
Justice Verma
Committee’s report was
submitted after 29 days
and recommended that:
1: Asked for review of
the Armed Forces
(Special Powers) Act,
1958.
2: Set the maximum
punishment of death
penalty instead of life
imprisonment
Background: On
December 23, 2012 a
three member
Committee headed by
Justice J.S. Verma,
former Chief Justice of
the Supreme Court, was
constituted to
recommend
amendments to the
Criminal Law so as to
provide for quicker trial
and enhanced
punishment for
criminals accused
of committing sexual
assault against women.
The other members on
the Committee were
Justice
Leila Seth, former
judge of the High Court
and Gopal
Subramanium, former
Solicitor General of
India.
A judicial committee
headed by Justice
Verma was appointed
by the central
government to
submit a report in 30
days regarding the
amendments and
suggestions relating to
reforms in laws
concerning sexual
violence against
women.
Justice Verma
Committee’s report was
submitted after 29 days
and recommended that:
1: Asked for review of
the Armed Forces
(Special Powers) Act,
1958.
2: Set the maximum
punishment of death
penalty instead of life
imprisonment
The Criminal Law has been amended, according to the Justice Verma Committee's proposal, to
make it more harsh and expedite the legal process for those accused of sexual assault against
women. The Committee was shown the report on January 23, 2013.

BACKGROUND

While pursuing a degree in physiotherapy, JYOTHI SINGH, also known as NIRBHAYA, was sexually raped
at the age of 23. She was on her way back home from Select City Walk, a theater in Saket, South Delhi,
where she had seen a movie with a male friend. While waiting for a journey at the Munirka bus station
in Delhi, a small child who was among the accused shouted to other passengers that the vehicle was
headed to Dwarka. Suspicion was aroused when the bus went off course with its doors closed. When the
male companion expressed his dissatisfaction with the route direction, six other males who were
already on the bus harassed him. These men launched an attack after the fight, unintentionally
strangling their comrade with an iron rod. The male accused took advantage of the situation and shoved
Nirbhaya into the backseat while the driver was still in charge of the vehicle. She struggled with them for
roughly sixty minutes, during which they hit her with the iron rod and sexually harassed her. The men
had ripped her intestines apart and forcefully crushed her internal organs, according to the police
investigation. The weathered iron rod resembles the handle of a tire jack.

When the accused children found out that the wife had passed away, they threw the couple from the
moving bus, leaving them without any clothes or possessions. They were taking retaliatory action. At
about eleven p.m., bystanders on the road noticed the two critically ill victims. The Delhi police took
them straight to Safdarjung Hospital. Jyothi had vital signs that were dangerously low, which the doctors
in charge of the emergency ward could see. Because of all the bite wounds and scars, her face was so
bloated and bleeding that it was unrecognizable. Following the medical report's confirmation that the
victim had been sexually molested by the gang member, she underwent numerous treatment sessions.
The examination showed that the horrific stomach wounds from the attack were primarily caused by the
iron rod, in addition to the significant damage it had caused to her uterus, intestines, and genitalia.
Nirbhaya endured physical and sexual abuse in addition to neglect.
Before her tragic death on December 29, 2012, from multiple organ failure, an internal hemorrhage, and
cardiac arrest, she received extensive medical care and therapy.

FACTS OF THE CASE

1 PROSECUTOR V. AKAYESU, CASE NO. ICTR-96-4-T, JUDGEMENT, 597 (SEPT. 2,

1998),

2 STATE OF KARNATAKA V. KRISHNAPPA (2000) 4 SCC 75, 15 (INDIA).

3 MUKESH AND ANRS. VS NCT DELHI (NIRBHAYA CASE) (2017) 6 SCC 1

REPERCUSSIONS

Following this horrifying attack, Nirbhaya experienced multiple organ failure, internal
bleeding, and cardiac arrest. She passed away at Singapore's Mount Elizabeth Hospital on
December 29, 2012. She was taken there not only for an organ replacement but also for
additional medical care. The public outcry over this led to the organization of other candlelight
marches, solidarity initiatives, and protests across the country. There were open demonstrations
in the vicinity of India Gate on December 21, 2012. After Jyothi's death on December 29, 2012,
India witnessed several rallies. Mourners dressed entirely in black, covered their lips with black
fabric, and staged candle marches in an attempt to encourage silence. These Indian protests
sparked protests in Paris, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and other South Asian
countries. The UPA administration was under pressure to pass stricter laws that forbade rape
and other sexual misconduct. The horrifying event shocked India's conscience, brought
attention from abroad, and revealed the scope of sexual assault against women in that nation.

JUDGEMENT OF THE CASE

The Trial Court found, after analyzing and examining the case's facts, that it fell under the
category of "rarest of rare cases," in which the perpetrators have employed their animosity and
authority to violate human rights, kill, and treat the victim like a piece of property. The Delhi
High Court and the Trail Court rendered the identical judgments, fining and sentencing all four
of the guilty culprits by the sum of Rs 10,000. Even when the offenders filed an appeal, the
rulings rendered by the Trial Court, High Court, and Supreme Court were remained
enforceable. The Trial Court, the High Court, and the Supreme Court referred to this as the
"RAREST OF RARE CASES The five-year-old was given a three-year prison sentence and
treated like a child despite having committed a horrific act. Following a trial, Juvenile Justice
settled on the minor's sentencing. A sixth individual committed suicide while the trial was
going on They submitted a review petition and appealed the Supreme Court's verdict, but the
Court again denied it, arguing that it raised no new legal concerns and had no extra cause for
review. After the review and curative petitions were denied, they submitted a compassion plea.
The president refused the four guilty parties' requests for clemency after negotiating with the
central cabinet. The president stressed that the death sentence would be administered to all four
of the guilty individuals. On March 20, 2020, the sentence and punishment were ultimately
carried out by hanging, following three delays.

ANALYSIS

The Criminal Code was revised by the Criminal Amendment Act of 2013, also known as the
Nirbhaya Act of 2013. After being enacted into law, the Nirbhaya Act, 2013 became operative.
It amended the sentencing criteria for this form of action, addressed and excluded marital rape,
and established a procedure for prosecuting acid assaults.

The definition of rape was broadened by the amendment. It altered the meaning that section
375 of the Indian Penal Code provided. The violent and involuntary penetration of a woman's
body without her consent, including the mouth, anus, vagina, or urethra, is now considered
rape, as per Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code The amendment was impacted by two key
examples. Among these were the Justice Verma Committee report and the Nirbhaya tragedy.
The group suggested implementing more punitive criminal legislation, speeding judicial
proceedings, and stiffening penalties for acts like sexual assault against women in order to
maintain women's rights. Various policies have been implemented by several states to
guarantee the safety of women in their communities. The Tamil Nadu government launched a
thirteen-point action plan to protect women in the state. The Karnataka government
consequently set up a 24-hour hotline for reporting cases of female sexual assault. A Synopsis
Of The New Offenses And Protocols The Justice Verma Committee Has Revised the Criminal
Code Guidelines A judicial committee headed by Justice Verma was constituted by the
national government, and they were given thirty days to suggest amendments to the laws
concerning the sexual abuse of women. Following a 29-day delay, the Justice Verma
Committee's report was eventually submitted, and it contained the following recommendations:
1: Requested a review of the 1958 Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act.

2. Rather than life in prison, the death penalty—the greatest punishment imaginable—should
be adopted.
3. The plan to lower the juvenile age from 18 to 16 was also turned down by the committee.
4: It was also stated that a husband is not need to request or permit sexual assault.
5: The committee proposed making abusive gestures and non-penetrative, non-consensual
sexual contact against women illegal and punishing those who participate in them.
6. Only sexual intercourse is defined as rape under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Following this event, forced sexual intercourse and behavior were included to Section 375 of
the IPC. The amendment defines rape as any forcible, involuntary intrusion into any portion of
the victim's body—such as her mouth, urethra, vagina, or anus—without her consent. The IPC's
Section 375 has this sentence. The Nirbhaya incident and the advice given by the Justice
Verma Committee had a significant impact on this shift As part of the modifications, Section
164 (5A) of the CrPC was added, which mandates that the victim's account be recorded by the
judicial magistrate as soon as the victim reports the incident to the police.

8: When the nature or degree of the victim's assent is unclear in a criminal case, Section 53 of
the Indian Evidence Act was added to handle the victim's prior sexual activity, the accused's
moral character, and the victim's agreement. Potential crime scenes were cited in reference to
Sections 354A, 354B, 354C, 354D, 376, 376A, 376B, 376C, 376D, and 376E of the IPC.

EXPLANATION

The report was delivered to the Committee on January 23, 2013. Legislative recommendations
were made on a range of topics, including victim assessments, rape, child exploitation,
trafficking, law enforcement, and sexual harassment. We enumerate the Committee's main
recommendations.
Sexual assault: The Committee suggested that the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) serve as the
legal foundation for classifying sexual assaults. The Committee states that acts of strength and
passion are what drive sexual assault and rape. Rape should not be restricted to penetration of the
mouth, anus, or vagina; rather, it should be regarded as a distinct criminal act. Rape is the term
used to describe any sexual act performed on a victim without that victim's permission.
The IPC treats rape that occurs outside of marriage differently from rape that occurs inside. In
India, it is forbidden to have sex with someone else without that person's permission. However,
inadvertent sexual relations between a husband and wife are not considered a crime of rape. The
Committee suggested eliminating the exclusion for rape that takes place inside a marriage. The
idea that marriage is a legally binding contract that forbids having sex is false. Therefore, it
would be wrong to conclude that the accused's relationship with the victim justifies the sexual
behavior based merely on the claim.

According to Section 354 of the IPC, sexual assault is currently punished by two years in jail for
assault or use of criminal force to a woman with the intent to outrage her modesty." There is no
definition for "outraging a woman's modesty" in the IPC. Therefore, Section 354 of the IPC
applies to the offense if penetration cannot be demonstrated. The Committee suggested
classifying non-penetrative sex as sexual assault. Any non-penetrative, non-consensual touching
that has a sexual component is classified as sexual assault. When determining how seductive an
act is, the smaller details must be taken into account. The need for sexual fulfillment shouldn't
have to be proven before it is accepted. For the offense, one should get a fine, a five-year prison
sentence, or both

Three to seven years in prison should be the penalty for forcing a woman to undress.
Verbal sexual assault is classified as "insulting a woman's modesty" under Section 509 of the
IPC. This violation has a maximum sentence of one year in jail, a fine, or both. It is necessary to
repeal this section. The Committee recommends that a year in prison or a year's worth of fines be
the most severe punishment for sexual assault. It is described as the expression of an unwanted
sexual threat through body language, nonverbal cues, or facial expressions.
Sexual abuse: The Committee on the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention,
Prohibition and Redressal) Bill, 2012, which is currently pending before Parliament, made the
following important recommendations. The Bill stipulates that the complainant and respondent
must start the initial attempt at resolution. Employees who operate from home also need to be
safeguarded. This goes against the ruling in Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan by the Supreme
Court, which sought to provide women with access to a secure workplace. Why The measure's
goal is undermined by the corporation's necessity to establish an internal complaints committee
and bring problems before it. An Employment Tribunal must hear the victim's claim of sexual
harassment and make a determination if the victim's employer refuses to address it.
Trafficking: The Committee clarified that the 1956 Immoral Trafficking Prevention Crime Act
only outlawed crimes related to prostitution; it did not outlaw the act of trafficking itself. It
suggested amending the anti-slavery sections of the Indian Penal Code to make it illegal to traffic
in persons who are coerced, intimidated, or under duress. Additionally, it advised against hiring
someone who had experienced human trafficking. The High Courts will oversee the execution of
victim rehabilitation programs and have legal control over facilities for the protection of women
and children.

Child sexual abuse: The Committee recommended that the Juvenile Justice Act of 2000's
definitions of "harm" and "health" be expanded to include the juvenile's physical and mental
health as well as any possible psychological or physical traumas. The Committee rejected
chemical castration as a form of punishment for crimes against women since it did not address
the root causes of sexual assault. It said that the death sentence shouldn't be applied as a
deterrence for more serious crimes because there is insufficient evidence to warrant it in rape
cases. Life in prison was recommended for rape.

Medical examination of a sexual assault victim: The Committee recommends doing away with
the two-finger test, which gauges the suppleness of the vaginal muscles. The Supreme Court has
declared in a number of cases that the two-finger test is illegal and that the victim's level of
consent should not be assessed based on their prior history of sexual activity.
Election-related reforms: The Committee suggests amending the 1951 Representation of People
Act. Acts pertaining to terrorism, sati, untouchability, election fairness, and secularism currently
disqualify candidates. The Committee thought that filing a charge sheet and getting a judge's
approval was all that was required to remove a candidate from office under the Act. It went on to
state that candidates with a history of sexual misconduct need to be permanently barred from
running for public office. Reforms in education: The Committee is against the sexification of
children's literature. A proposal has been made for youth sexuality education. Programs for adult
literacy are essential for empowering women.
LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS

The Justice Verma committee's recommendations were incorporated into the country's criminal
code on February 1, 2013, by the Cabinet Ministers. Consequently, on March 19 and 21,
respectively, the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha enacted the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill. On
April 3, 2013, the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act—also known as the Nirbhaya Act—went
into effect. It announced that the 1973 Code of Criminal Procedure, Indian Evidence Act, and
Indian Penal Code—all of which deal with sexual offenses—will alter.
On December 22, 2015, the Rajya Sabha passed the Juvenile Justice Bill, lowering the age of a
juvenile offender from 18 to 16. The government created the Nirbhaya Fund, which is overseen
by the Department of Economic Affairs, to support governmental and non-governmental
organizations in their attempts to shield women from such horrific crimes.

CONCLUSION

The Nirbhaya case incident proves that a man can indeed "mutilate" a woman beyond
recognition. This type of behavior will always be viewed as the pinnacle of immorality in our
culture since it is motivated more by macho pride and rage than by desire.
Severe preventive actions need to be implemented in order to stop these crimes from occurring.
In addition, you would be putting an end to the crimes carried out by sociopaths and other driven
offenders who don't give a damn about the law or social mores.
The Justice Verma Committee's recommendations on women's rights in general and sexual
offenses in particular are projected to have a major impact on Indian law. The Committee's
Report distinguished sexual assault from the honor-chastity-modesty paradigm that currently
directs the definition for the legal and public systems by defining it as a violation of sexual
autonomy.