ISSUES
Scandal in God's Own Country
AMMU JOSEPH
|
The Suryanelli case blew the lid off the sex mafia in Kerala. But the recent acquittal of all but one of the accused in the first of several such cases may cap progress in securing justice for victims and preventing similar crimes.
|
PHOTO: R.V. MOORTHY
Protests Galore: Women's groups feel the judgment conveys a negative message.
THE Supreme Court of India's recent strictures on judicial leniency towards rapists should bring some relief to survivors of sexual assault and the lawyers and women's groups helping them to seek justice.
Twenty five years after the countrywide campaign against rape, sparked off by an insensitive judgement by the apex court in the infamous "Mathura rape case," the incidence of rape in all its variety — custodial, gang, minor, elder, et al — continues to be unacceptably high, while the conviction rate in the few cases that make it to the courts remains low.
A two-member bench comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat and S.H. Kapadia cautioned against the use of "mitigating factors" to justify lighter sentences for rapists in a judgement reviewing the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court to reduce the sentence of a man convicted of rape to 11 months (down from the seven years imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000 awarded by the trial court) on the ground that he was an "illiterate labourer" and only 20 years old.
Including rape among crimes with serious social consequences, and highlighting the necessary relationship between the social effects of the offence and the nature of the sentence, the judges said courts had an obligation to award exemplary punishment to the guilty in such cases. According to them, undue sympathy towards those convicted of such crimes would undermine people's confidence in the justice system, which in turn would weaken it.
Victims on trial
If undue sympathy towards perpetrators of rape is unjustifiable, so surely is undue severity towards their victims. Yet, all too often, the latter find themselves in the dock, with both courts and the general public scrutinising their character and behaviour for some sign that they may have "asked for it" or, at least, not effectively resisted it. The social impact of this unfortunate tendency to put rape victims on trial is obvious: few rapes are reported and even fewer taken to court, even as the threat of rape haunts most women and restricts their access to and exercise of many fundamental human rights.
A recent judgement of the Kerala High Court in the infamous Suryanelli serial rape case has caused concern in this context. The case involved a 16-year-old school girl from Suryanelli, a small settlement in the high ranges ofIdukki district, who was transported from place to place across the state and sexually assaulted by a series of men over a 40-day period in 1996. The accused, initially estimated at 42, included some well-known and well-placed individuals.
The Special Court set up three years after the scandal became public handed down stiff punishments to 35 of the accused in September 2000 (although they were let off on bail by the High Court a week later). That sentence left out two of the accused, who were then absconding. One of them -- S. S. Dharmarajan of Ponkunnam, a lawyer and the key accused -- was subsequently arrested, and the Special Court sentenced him to life imprisonment in 2002.
On 20 January 2005, the High Court acquitted the 35 convicted earlier and found Dharmarajan guilty only of crimes related to the sex trade (procuring and selling a minor for purposes of prostitution, etc.). Accordingly, his sentence was reduced to five years and fines amounting to Rs. 50,000.
According to the judges, the prosecution had not effectively proved the culpability of the 36 accused in the more serious crimes of rape, gang rape, abduction, illegal detention and sale of a minor girl for sexual abuse that they were originally convicted for. Nor, they said, was there credible evidence of any conspiracy to commit these and other crimes against the girl. They also took the investigating and prosecuting authorities to task for various sins of omission and commission in the process of building up the case.
Critics of the judgement are particularly concerned about its likely impact on the victim and her family, as well as on the outcome of similar, ongoing cases and the uphill battle against all forms of violence against women. The young woman, now 25, is working as a peon in a government office — a job she was given on compassionate grounds — trying to rebuild her life after the multiple ordeals she suffered both during and after her nightmarish experience of nearly a decade ago.
The judges' observations about the character and past behaviour of the teenaged girl, the veracity of her testimony, and the motive that drove her and her parents to file a police complaint, are unlikely to help in this process.
Negative message?
The extensive discussion in the judgement on whether or not she had consented to sexual intercourse with the accused - or, at least, not made the absence of consent clear - is particularly surprising considering her age at the time: just a year over the age at which sexual intercourse with her would have amounted to statutory rape. The stress laid on physical signs of resistance as well as on corroborative evidence is also disturbing, especially since courts have in the past accepted the fact that such evidence is seldom available in rape cases.
It is widely feared that the judgement could weaken similar cases that are currently at various stages of trial in several of the state's courts. Women's groups in Kerala also believe that it conveys a negative message to women caught in the web of the organised sex mafia operating in the state. According to them, a new sense of despair and despondency is already perceptible among these women.
This is a serious fallout in view of growing evidence of an increase in sexual violence against women, as well as organized sex rackets designed to ensnare young women as well as minor girls, in Kerala. Only a couple of these have made national headlines, mainly thanks to the alleged involvement of a prominent politician. For the record, soon after the Suryanelli story broke, another one - known as the Vithura case - came to light. This, too, involved the sexual exploitation of a minor girl over a prolonged period in 1995-96. None of the accused, including a film star and a senior public servant, has so far been punished — in fact, the first accused has not even been apprehended yet.
More cases
Three more cases became public the following year. The Pandalam case involved a college student who was physically abused by several men, including some lecturers of her college. The Special Court found all the accused guilty but their appeals are now pending in the High Court. In the Kothamangalam case, an ex-minister is among the 198 accused. The Calicut Ice-cream Parlour case, which made news again not long ago, involved the alleged sexual exploitation of women and girls by senior government officers and political leaders.
The Thoppumpady case involving a 17-year-old girl came to light in 2002. A film director is among the accused and it is suspected that a pornographic film was made featuring the sexual abuse of the victim. The 250 accused have yet to be taken into custody.
More recent cases include the alleged gang rape and murder of a young woman in Kiliroor and the "honour killing" — arguably the first in Kerala — of another gang rape victim by her brother.
Something is clearly rotten in the state, celebrated as much for its achievements in human development as for its natural beauty. Something will clearly have to be done to stem the rot if Kerala is to continue basking in the glory of being widely known as God's Own Country.
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Magazine
