Facts of The Case

Nirbhaya is the pseudonym used for the rape victim of the infamous 16
December 2012 Delhi gang rape incident. On just another chilly December
night in Delhi, Nirbhaya and her friend were returning from a movie theatre,
they were waiting for a bus. One of the would-be culprits convinced them to
get on an empty bus with tinted windows. They were assaulted by six males,
one of whom was a minor, aged 17.

The friend, when he tried to protect Nirbhaya, was beaten up by the

perpetrators. Nirbhaya was not just sexually violated, her body was
mutilated beyond human imagination. Her intestines were pulled out, and
private parts mutilated. She later died of multiple organ failure, internal
bleeding and cardiac arrest on the 29th of December.

Social Reaction
There was a lot of social outrage due to the gruesome incident. There were a
lot of candle light marches, solidarity movements and protests. India has
always been notorious for being unsafe for women, and this was the spark
which ignited the fire of public outrage. The outrage was not restricted to
India, the whole world had formed an opinion about India. A British
documentary called Indias Daughter was banned by the central
government because it portrayed India in a very derogatory and poor light.

A majority of the outrage poured out on social media. In the contemporary

times, with easy access to technology, the reactions on social media often
reflect the mood and situation in the country. The hashtags #GangRape,
#JyotiSingh #Nirbhaya and so on became trending on various websites.
Organisations like All India Progressive Womens Association (AIPWA) also
made its mark. Its secretary became one of the lead voices for womens
rights on Twitter.
Feminist and womens movements gained momentum and incentive. The
culprits were made an example of and condemned. Not just social, there
were legal repercussions of the incident too. The UPA government was being
pressurised to make stricter laws regarding rape and dealing with juveniles
committing heinous crimes.

Did the Nirbhaya Outrage Start a Long Term

Evolution
The Nirbhaya gang rape was definitely the spark that ignited the fire for
womens rights and womens safety. But sadly, the fire was short lived. The
public outrage died in a few months, and with it, womens issues took their
usual place in the daily agenda.

In early 2016, a dalit girl was brutally gangraped in the Ernakulam district of
Kerala. The rape was as brutal as the Nirbhaya gang rape case. But the
social outrage about the incident was disproportionate to that of the
Nirbhaya case, and as some argue, disproportionate to the crime.

This raises the question, whether the fact that Nirbhaya was a Delhi based
upper caste girl as opposed to a poor law student from Ernakulam, Kerala,
had some role to play in the difference in the social reaction. It could
probably just be luck and insufficient media presence in that district, but the
contrast is uncanny. The idea that a difference in location can make so much
difference in media coverage for such issues is disturbing. This raises the
question whether there are other unreported incidents.

The Legal Perspective

Law About Rape and Sexual Harassment in India

Rape
In the case of Parhlad and Ors v State of Haryana, the court called an
offence of rape as basically an assault on the human rights of the victim. It
was seen as an attack on the individuality and physical sovereignty of a
woman. It is important to note that according to Section 375 of the
Indian Penal Code, only a man can commit rape, and only on a
woman.

Until 2012, the definition of rape was restricted just to sexual intercourse.
The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 gave a broader meaning to the
term rape. It amended the definition under Section 375 of the IPC. Section
375 of the IPC, after the amendment, defines rape as any involuntary and
forceful penetration without the womans consent into the womans body
parts like the vagina, urethra, mouth or anus.

Two developments had a major impact on the amendment. These were the
Nirbhaya incident and the Justice Verma Committee report.

Suggested Reading: Human Castration as Rape Punishment in India

Justice Verma Committee Report

Just about a week after the Nirbhaya incident, Committee on Amendments to

Criminal Law (Justice Verma Committee) was formed to suggest some long
needed changes to criminal laws, especially with respect to womens rights.
The members of the committee were Justice J.S. Verma (Chairperson),
former Chief Justice of India, Justice Leila Seth, a former High Court Judge,
and Gopal Subramanium, former Solicitor General of India.

The recommendations of the committee were broadly relating to womens

issues, sexual offences, human trafficking, education and electoral reforms.

Highlights of the Report Relating to Sexual Assault and Rape Are as

Follows:
 The committee backed the argument of various social scientists that rape is
not simply a crime of passion. It is an expression of power. So, the Committee
felt, the definition of rape does not cover the issue accurately.
o The Nirbhaya case is a clear example of the insufficiency of the
previous definition under Section 375 of the IPC.
Any non-consensual penetration of sexual nature was included in its ambit.
It recommended making marital rape an offence. Despite the
recommendation, no action has been taken. It is still an exception under
Section 375 of the IPC.
Punishments
o The report also recommended the abolition of the two-finger test.
Two-finger test The doctor inserts two fingers into the
vagina of the victim to determine whether the woman was
habituated to sex.
Undoubtedly, the two-finger test and its
interpretation violates the right of rape survivors
to privacy, physical and mental integrity and
dignity. Thus, this test, even if the report is
affirmative, cannot ipso facto, be given rise to
presumption of consent Supreme Court
in Lillu v State of Haryana
The committee recommended that death penalty should
be abolished, and maximum punishment should be life
imprisonment. The recommendation has not been passed
as a law.
o Setting up of a Rape Crisis Cell for legal aid of the victims.

Nirbhaya Fund
As a reaction to the public outrage and reaction, the then Finance Minister, P.
Chidambaram, allocated a lot of money for tackling womens issues. He
announced the Nirbhaya Fund in Parliament on his Budget Speech 2013-
14. This showed an acceptance, either willing or forced, about the dire
situation of womens safety in India. The initial amount allocated for the
same was a whooping INR 1000 Crore. Further, every year the same amount
is reallocated in the budget.

Implementation of the Nirbhaya Fund

In 2013, the government set aside about INR 321 crores for a project for
sending distress calls through daily use gadgets like phones, which has not
been implemented due to fund not being allotted for the project.

Further, there had been proposals to put GPS trackers in trains, buses and
such public transport, train stations etc. About Rs.1000 Crore was allotted to
this, but even this has not been implemented on a large scale.

A womens helpline has been started, but it is not accessible to most rural
areas.

One Stop Centres for rape victims exist just one paper.

Central Victims Compensation Fund has been set with a budget of Rs.200
Crores. Karnataka and Tamil Nadu have never withdrawn from the same.

The broad points about the implementation of the scheme again highlights
how the Nirbhaya movement was a fad, and although the public and the
government is still aware of the state of women in India, not much is being
done for the same.

Name of a Rape Victim and Why Is It a

Controversy
Section 228A of the Indian Penal Code prohibits anyone (especially the
media) to print or publish the identity of the victim in cases of rape. The
guilty may be imprisoned for two years, along with being liable for a fine.

Crimes of the nature of rape are usually associated with a lot of social
stigma. The section aims at preventing the social victimization of the victim.
Nirbhayas Name

Section 228A(c) provides for an exception to the rule when the name can be
made public when, in case of the death of the victim, the next of kin of the
victim can permit the same. This happened in the case of Nirbhaya. The
victims mother, Asha Devi, herself made Nirbhayas name known to the
public saying the world should know what happened to her daughter. She
felt that no rape victim should be ashamed of being raped, as it is the
perpetrator of the crime who is at fault, not her.

But a contradiction arose when her father prohibited naming the victim in the
documentary Indias Daughter, and even threatened of legal action. But
they still have permitted the usage of their daughters name in media
reports. Most media houses do not mention Nirbhayas name as a force of
habit, and also as a way of respect.

Conclusion
India is known for a lot of things. The positive ones are its culture, diversity
of religion, cricket prowess, beautiful scenic beauty. But often, a few
incidents take place which make these positive factors take a backseat in
foreign, and even domestic public opinion. The Nirbhaya incident was the
spark which ignited the fire of negative public opinion about India.

It was recently printed in Sex Roles, a journal analysing womens issues,

gave academic backing to something we all Indians are aware of. It
highlighted how beliefs that blame women for their victimization, in
turn, provide legitimacy to violence against women.

Almost non-existent implementation of government schemes for betterment

of womens situation is one of the main reasons for the dire situation of
women in India. Although the same callous attitude is visible in a lot of
places, it affects the problem of women more. This is because the callous
attitude is not just administrative or political, it is rooted in society and
morality.