Section 354 Indian Penal Code

A suggestion to amend the law. Please share your valuable comments:

Indian Penal Code
Section 354: Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modestyWhoever assaults or uses criminal force to any woman, intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby outrage her modesty, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

STATE AMENDMENTS

ANDHRA PRADESH

Section 354. Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modestyWhoever assaults or uses criminal force to any woman, intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby outrage her modesty, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which also shall not be less than five years but which may extend to seven years and also be liable to fine.Provided that the court may, fore adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgement, imposed a sentence of imprisonment of either description of a term which may be less then five years, but which shall not be less than two years.

MADHYA PRADESH

Section 354A. Assault or use of criminal force to woman with intent to disrobe herWhoever assaults or uses criminal force to any woman or abets or conspires to assault or uses such criminal force to any intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that by such assault, he will thereby outrage or causes to be outraged the modesty of woman by disrobing or compel her to be naked on any public place, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which also shall not be less than one year but which may extend to ten years and also be liable to fine. [Vide Madhya Pradesh Act 14 of 2004, section 3 (w.e.f.2-12-2004)]STATE OF ORISSA: In the First Schedule to the said Code in the entry under column 5 relating to section 345 or the IndianPenal Code 1860 for the word” bailabe’ the word ‘non bailable’ shall be substituted .

Suggestion to amend the section:

Section 354. Assault or criminal force to a person with intent to outrage the modesty of the personWhoever assaults or uses criminal force to any person, intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that the abuser will thereby outrage the person modesty, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which also shall not be less than five years but which may extend to seven years and also be liable to fine.
Provided that if the person in respect of whom an offence committed under this section is a child below the age of 18 years the punishment provided under this section shall extend to imprisonment for a term of not less than seven years.

Who owns the child?

Who owns the child, police department or the court or the child welfare committee or NGO or the child rights commission, Who Actually? It is difficult to say who is actually the guardian of the child, if the child abused by her own family member. A girl, child sexually abused by the father, on which emotionally she must have relied upon the most and who is supposed to be the caretaker of the child. By the brother, who is supposed to fulfill all the demands of his sister or by the person to whom the child knows best, residing as a neighbor of the family or by grandfather or by chacha, or by mama, or by uncle or anyother person. In approximately more than 90% of sexual abuse cases, the victim knows the abuser. This act crashes the trust of the child and makes her vulnerable for whole life. The financial dependency and society pressure is so high that it is difficult or almost impossible for the mother or other family member to raise voice against the perpetrator in the family. Even after loosing all the trust from all the quarters in the family sometime these girls show big courage and raise their voice against the brutality. They find someone to whom they can share their feelings and emotions, confront their pain and trust again. It could be her mother, friend, teacher, classmate, or any other person. And when abusive act comes in the public domain then the emotional scuffle turns into a legal battle.

From here, another journey starts. Who owns the child? Who would take stand for her? Who would defend her? Who would reinstate faith and trust in her towards life and society at large? The child meet police, NGO, Child Welfare Committee popularly called as CWC under (Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000) and shares her trauma with all them as if, she is revising the chapter from her book. She shows trust in all of them with the thought they might give justice to her. First Information report lodged and case comes up for the trial at session level. The girl has to stay at the children homes under the custody of Child Welfare Committee.

Ninety days, time for filing charge sheet in the Session Court, give ample amount of time to the family for pressurizing the victim. A child turns hostile and changes her statement. Court verdicts, the prime witness turned hostile, case disposed off and accused acquitted. Family members file an application for custody of the child. Without looking the gravity of the offence; session court pass order “custody should be given to relative of the child as child has also shown interest for going back in the family” “signature of the child also taken”. Irrespective of the fact that the child is going in the same abusive family environment but the custody order passed.

When relatives goes to Child Welfare Committee ask for the child, as the order passed by the session judge, it is difficult for the CWC to refuse it, irrespective of the fact that they have the authority to take the stand on the issue related with the child care, protection and rehabilitation. However, they do not take the stand and give the child to the family member where the abuser is also residing. They do not willing or interested in sharing the facts to the session court. It is a power structure, nobody wants think out of the box, wants to take risk and consider about the child’s trauma. If the child sent back in the same abusive family with the same abuser what will happen to her. Who will decide? Who is thinking about the child and who owns the child?
Prepared by: Vipin Bhatt HAQ: Centre for Child Rights

Remembering the first time National Bravery Award for stopping Child Marriage was given

On the occasion of India's 61st Republic Day, HAQ is proud to remember that in 2003, HAQ had for the first time taken the initiative encourage Indian Council for Child Welfare (ICCW) to recognise children intervening to stop 'Child Marriage' as an act of bravery worthy of National Bravery Award. Since then, it is every wondeful to see that each year children are given bravery awards for stoppin child marriages.

Bharti Ali, co-director of HAQ and National Convener of Campaign against Child Trafficking (CACT), had taken a strong initiative to ensure that 5 girls from a school in Karnal were recognised for their extreme act of bravery for bringing to notice and thus stopping the marraige of their classmate with the support of their teacher.

Below mentioned links could be visted for further details, on the 2003 National Bravery Awards given to the 5 girls:

http://www.icrw.org/photoessay/html/future_subs/grassroots.htm

http://www.hinduonnet.com/2004/01/25/stories/2004012503771000.htm

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2004/20040125/nation.htm#1