The judgment by the Madras High Court judge, Justice P. Devadass, ordering mediation in a rape case . is a retrograde step in the justice delivery system (“ >Madras HC urged to recall rape case from mediation ”, “‘ >Mediation, a good move by court ’”, and “ >A carriage of injustice ”, all June 26). That the same judge has taken an opposite view on the same day in an another rape case (“ >Same judge, different order ”, some editions, June 26) also shows that the learned judge is fully aware of the implications of rape. Hence, it is beyond one’s comprehension how he pronounced his judgment in the first case, especially after legal pronouncements following the 2012 Delhi rape case. The Supreme Court, by taking a suo motu stand, should intervene in the case.
S. Nallasivan,
Tirunelveli
To me, the order seems no better than the patriarchal orders made by khap panchayats in Haryana. Such mediation is not only unethical but an evil crime against the rape survivor which will only cause her further mental and social trauma. In simple terms, it reflects the misogynistic attitude still prevalent in the judiciary. If this is the way justice is dispensed in a modern political state, then we are no better than those citizens in a religious state whose decrees are biased and in favour of men.
C.P. Trivedi,
New Delhi
The order reminded me of a popular TV show in South India, where a personality adopts the role of mediator and tries to effect a compromise between the parties concerned, all within one episode. Rape is a social evil and a crime. The reason for the increase in such crimes is nothing but the lack of proper punishment. Unless and until the punishment is made severe, these crimes will go on forever. The Justice of the High Court is not a Natamai or mediator of a village sitting under a peepal tree to pass his “verdict”. He is an honourable man of law. All these days we have heard of justice being delayed and of justice being denied. But this seems to be first time where we hear of the justice being degenerated. If judges are there to advocate only mild remedies like mediation, where is the necessity for courts and judges?
Meenakshi Pattabiraman,
Madurai
It appears that many have not understood the intent of the judge. I am sure that he must have pondered over the future of the survivor who now has a child born out of the rape. His order only shows his good intent as he wanted her life to be settled and must have also considered that the accused will be released once the awarded sentence is completed. Then what? The accused will try and start a new life while the survivor will be in her twenties trying to lead a life which may not be easy. The judge has only thought of a way out to help settle the lives of the persons concerned. Our country and our people have to grow up in their thinking. No doubt there is law and justice but there is also something called a humanitarian angle which is also one of the goals of justice. My request to those who are up in arms over the order is to look at it from the judge’s point of view and how it would mean giving new life to three people.
Shammer Shah,
Chennai
