The case of Shri Bodhisattwa Gautam vs Miss Subhra Chakraborty was a significant ruling for rape victims in India. The Supreme Court declared that it has the power to grant compensation for violations of Fundamental Rights under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution. This includes interim compensation for rape victims. The court recognized rape as a violation of the Fundamental Right to Life and Personal Dignity under Article 21. This case highlighted the struggles of rape victims and the need to reform patriarchal societal norms.
The petitioner, a lecturer at Baptist College in Kohima, developed a romantic relationship with the respondent, a student, in 1989. He deceived her with false promises of marriage, which led to their engagement in sexual intercourse. Whenever she asked about marriage, he postponed it with various excuses. The respondent became pregnant twice, in September 1993 and April 1994. Pressured by her situation, she insisted on marriage, leading to a secret ceremony in September 1993. The petitioner continued to abuse her, forcing her to undergo two abortions under false pretenses.
The Judicial Magistrate in Kohima found the petitioner guilty of deceiving the respondent and inducing her to live with him under false promises of marriage. He also forced her to undergo abortions, causing severe mental and physical harm. The petitioner was charged under sections 312, 420, 493, 496, and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. He appealed to the Gauhati High Court to quash the complaint, but the High Court rejected his petition. The petitioner then appealed to the Supreme Court.
The petitioner denied the charges and claimed the complaint was meant to harass him. He argued he could not pay financial support as he was unemployed after being terminated from his job at Cachar College.
The respondent argued the petitioner exploited her, had sexual intercourse under false promises, and forced her to undergo abortions. He abandoned her despite knowing they were not legally married when he applied vermillion on her forehead.
The Supreme Court noted that under Article 32, it has the power to protect Fundamental Rights, including granting compensation for their violation. Rape was recognized as a violation of the Fundamental Right to Life, which includes living with dignity. The Court emphasized that rape laws need to address the social impact of the crime more effectively. It also noted the need for interim compensation for rape victims, following principles from the Delhi Domestic Working Women's Forum case.
The Supreme Court upheld the Gauhati High Court's judgment and ruled against quashing the case. It ordered the petitioner to pay Rs. 1,000 per month as interim compensation to the respondent during the ongoing case. The Court emphasized that this judgment would not influence the final decision of the Judicial Magistrate's court.
Leave a comment