LLM Notes: From Outrage to Reform: How the Mathura Case Changed India’s Rape Laws

 Judgment of Tukaram v. State of Maharashtra (Mathura Rape Case)

Background and Facts

The case involved Mathura, a young tribal girl, who alleged that she was raped by two policemen, Tukaram and Ganpat, inside a police station. The Sessions Court initially acquitted the accused, reasoning that Mathura was "habituated to sexual intercourse" and that her consent was voluntary. The High Court overturned this acquittal, recognizing the power imbalance and holding that Mathura's submission was due to fear, not consent, and convicted the accused.

Supreme Court Judgment

The Supreme Court, in 1979, reversed the High Court's conviction and again acquitted the accused. The key points in the judgment were:

• The Court emphasized the absence of physical injuries and resistance as indicators of consent, stating that mere passive submission or lack of resistance could not be equated with lack of consent unless there was proof of threat of death or injury.

• The Court held that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the intercourse was without Mathura's consent or that her consent was obtained by fear of death or hurt.

• The Supreme Court also questioned Mathura's credibility, noting inconsistencies in her testimony and the lack of direct evidence of coercion.

Did This Judgment Lead to Amendment in Law?

Yes, the Supreme Court's judgment in the Mathura Rape Case led to widespread public outrage and protests, especially from women's groups and legal activists. This outcry prompted significant amendments to Indian rape laws through the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1983.

• Section 114A of the Indian Evidence Act was introduced, creating a presumption that if the victim states she did not consent, the court shall presume she did not consent (rebuttable presumption).

• Sections 376A, 376B, 376C, and 376D were added to the Indian Penal Code, specifically addressing custodial rape and shifting the burden of proof to the accused once sexual intercourse is established.

• Provisions for in-camera trials, prohibition of victim identity disclosure, and tougher sentences were also enacted.

Impact on Future Protection of Women Against Sexual Offences

The Mathura Rape Case and the subsequent amendments had a profound impact on the legal landscape regarding sexual offences in India:

• Broader Definition of Consent: The amendments clarified that passive submission or lack of physical resistance does not imply consent, especially in situations involving authority figures or custodial settings.

• Burden of Proof Shift: The law now places a greater burden on the accused to prove consent in custodial rape cases, rather than requiring the victim to prove lack of consent.

• Protection of Victims: Enhanced procedural safeguards were introduced, including in-camera trials and restrictions on disclosing the victim's identity, to protect the dignity and privacy of survivors.

• Catalyst for Women's Rights Movement: The case galvanized the women's rights movement in India, leading to greater awareness, support for victims, and advocacy for further reforms in laws related to sexual violence.

In summary:

The Supreme Court's judgment in Tukaram v. State of Maharashtra (Mathura Rape Case) was widely criticized for its narrow interpretation of consent and reliance on physical resistance. The public backlash led to crucial amendments in Indian law, improving the legal framework for prosecuting sexual offences and providing better protection and support for women victims of sexual violence.

Print Page