Craving

In its recent judgment Bombay High Court set a side lower court’s punishment of 7 years to a man charged with 10 counts of rape.

HT reports:
The victim had alleged that between April 2004 and October 2006, Anwar Khan Iqbal Khan (26) had called her to various places and raped her 10 times, each time allegedly promising to marry her after forcible intercourse, but ultimately refusing to keep his word, according to the victim
...
The high court, however, refused to believe the victims' version that she had not objected to the repeated sexual assaults due to the promise of marriage made by the accused. Justice A.H. Joshi held that: “On the face of the record, nothing except unqualified and unconditional consent for sexual intercourse would emerge.
…

The judge also refused to believe that “the victim had no craving for what was expected during every meeting and was repeatedly happening” considering the fact that she had not offered any resistance during any of the acts.


Satyajit Joshi, my colleague alerted me to this story. I read it twice. Later I read it once again. Then both of us smiled; smiled to learn judge’s surname.

On the sidenote I would like to ask, why didn't Court charge lady of perjury since it has already upheld man's views.

(Emphasis imported)

Should Rape Be Treated Like Other Crimes ?

Article by Niranjan Rajadhyaksha on how incentives matter, with special reference to commuting death sentence to lifer for rapist, crop up few points in the mind. The author writes: The death penalty for rape could create perverse incentives for rapists to murder their victims.

Does punishment dictate nature and severity of crime ?. Logically, the harsher the punishment, more deterrent it is. But in rape-cum-murder cases and even about other crimes, this logic is far from reality.

Whether rapist should be served with lifer or death is an issue of importance at par with how the society treat rape as a crime.

The record suggests, in most cases rapists kill victim. Contrary, in other crimes like robbery, chain snatching or economic offences, rate of culprits killing the sufferer is extremely low.

The perpetrators, having satisfied with their sexual desire, are often led by fear of getting caught. That fear drive them kill the victims, suggests confessions made by arrested rapists. Actually, murder after rape does not reduce chances of culprits’ arrest compared to when rapist abandon her without killing.

So then why rapist still prefers killing victim even though his primary intention is to meet sexual desire. ? I guess, the fear in rapist mind is more due to the possibly outcry because society apply different parameters to rape than other crimes.

I doubt if Rapist, once through with his first act, even think of incentives pertaining to the punishment and then decides whether to kill the victim, as pointed out by Rajadhyaksha. It is possibly the other way in which rapist after rape ceases to think under impression that outcry over the incident may land him into bigger trouble. The often seen outcome is then the murder of victim.

One possible way out to reduce rate of murders in rape cases can be society and her kin start treating victim equally as normal with the changed perception that rape is not the end of the road. And of course, to change that perception, start can be sentencing rapists with lifer than death.