Рет қаралды 50,564
Specific Google form link for any clarification:
forms.gle/AH8B...
FOR OTHER VIDEOS
KZbin Channel Link- bit.ly/3mrqWYS
FOLLOW ME at Linkedin- ubAdvocate page- bit.ly/32IFco8
AT FACEBOOK-
Share your experience in law and with the legal system with Author. It will help us to improve the system - rb.gy/wikusn
In various significant verdicts, Supreme Court has ruled that punishment to a rape convict cannot be reduced or condoned even if the victim forgave the accused and entered into a compromise with him.
Rape is a non-compoundable offence and it is an offence against society and is not a matter to be left for the parties to compromise and settle.
The court cannot always be assured that the consent given by the victim in compromising the case is genuine consent. There is every chance that she might have been pressurised by the convicts or the trauma
Such compromises, if reached, are per se illegal and the provision for a lesser punishment for heinous offences in exceptional cases cannot be treated in a casual manner.
There has been an increasing tendency amongst trial courts to permit compromises on the ground that a settlement has been reached between the rapist and the victim.
The courts have been allowing compounding in rape cases on the basis of the fact that either accused has married the victim or offered to marry the victim.
Such soft attitude of the courts was opening a floodgate for the wrongdoers where they were getting successful in their agenda in an indirect manner.
This video endeavours to reflect the correct position of law. A compromise entered into between the parties cannot be construed as a leading factor based on which lesser punishment can be awarded. Rape is an offence against society and is not a matter to be left for the parties to compromise and settle. There is every chance that the victim might have been pressurized by the convicts or the trauma undergone by her all the years might have compelled her to opt for a compromise.
The accused may use all his influence to pressurize her for a compromise. So, in the interest of justice and to avoid unnecessary pressure/harassment to the victim, it would not be safe in considering the compromise arrived at between the parties in rape cases to be a ground for the Court to exercise the discretionary power under section 482 of the Cr. P.C. either to close the case or reduce the punishment.
It is imperative to mention that the legislature through the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 has deleted this proviso 376(2)(g) in the wake of increasing crimes against women, which empowered the court to award lesser punishment than the minimum punishment for any special and adequate reasons.
Though, the said amendment will not come in the way of exercising discretion in this case, in an exceptional case, where the Court shall use its extraordinary discretion to reduce the period of the sentence than the minimum prescribed.
Despite stringent provisions for rape under Section 376 IPC, many Courts in the past have taken a softer view while awarding sentences for such a heinous crime. That few subordinate and High Courts have reduced the sentence of the accused to the period already undergone to suffice as the punishment, by taking aid of the proviso to Section 376(2) IPC. The above trend exhibits stark insensitivity to the need for proportionate punishments to be imposed in such cases.
To conclude, it has been held by the Apex Court that in a case of rape or attempt of rape, the conception of compromise under no circumstances can really be thought of.
Disclaimer-
The information provided in this video is for general information and education of the public at large, on the request of the viewers are based on personal views and understanding of the law and not intended to constitute any legal advice. It may not reflect the most current legal developments.
The video is not for any advertisement, personal communication, solicitation, invitation or inducement of any sort whatsoever to solicit any legal work through this KZbin channel. Viewers are advised to contact their own advocate for advice.
The viewers must always do their own diligence and anyone who wishes to apply the idea/s contained in the video, takes full responsibility for it and it is done at his/her own risks and consequences. Jeevan Prakash, Advocate or any others (if any) related to the production of this video does not take any direct, indirect or express or implied or punitive, special, incidental or any other consequential damages arising directly or indirectly on account of any action taken based on this video. We are not liable for any consequence of any action taken by the viewers relying on material/information provided in the video.