Rajasthan HC rejects Bail to REET Paper Leak Accused Ram Kripal Meena
Allahabad HC Reserves Verdict on Muslim Parties' Plea Against Varanasi Court Order
Jharkhand HC Announces 55 Assistant Positions in Ranchi; Online Applications Now Open!
Sister-in-Law's Frequent Visits Insufficient to Establish Residence in DV Case : Bombay HC
P&H HC Grants Interim Bail to Eight-Month Pregnant Woman Accused in Murder Case, Citing Health Risks to Mother and Unborn Child
Kerala HC Denies 'Non-Creamy Layer' Certification Plea, Citing Ineligibility Based on Hereditary Occupation Criteria
ED Shifts Sameer Wankhede's Money Laundering Case to Delhi, Informs Bombay HC
J& H HC Emphasizes Due Process, Slams Overuse of Preventive Detention under PSA
Madras High Court Quashes FIR Against Journalist Abhijit Majumder Over Periyar Remarks
Calcutta HC Takes Suo Motu Action on Alleged Sexual Assault and Land Transfer in Sandeshkhali
Penetration, however little, is an offence /s 377 IPC: Calcutta High Court

Penetration, however little, is an offence /s 377 IPC: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta high Court has ruled on 20.02.2023 that "Penetration, however little, is an offence under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code"

The Calcutta High Court observed this while refusing to quash a criminal case involving charges under Section 377 and allegations of sexual torture of a medical student by his senior.

The bench of Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) further observed that "even incomplete anal intercourse would constitute penetration, and that the same could be an ingredient to constitute the offence under Section 377 of the IPC".

The Court said “Penetration, however little is an offence. In the present case the opinion in the medical report is “No injury or evidence of complete anal intercourse could be detected” (so penetration however little (incomplete) in this case)...No injury or evidence of 'Complete anal intercourse' could be detected “is to be proved in trial as even incomplete anal intercourse prima facie proves penetration however little and is thus an essential ingredient (evidence) to prove the commission of offence under Section 377 IPC in this case”.

The Court was hearing a case held that this is an offense in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court’s in the case of Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India.

It was stated in the complaint by the complainant he was forcibly undressed and sexually tortured for about two hours by a doctor, who was one of the two accused in the case. The complainant further claimed that both accused had threatened him against speaking about the incident to others.

Both the accused persons moved the petition to quash the case filed against them.

The Court also observed that “Filing a complaint of such nature on having to face the ordeal for two and half long hours by a student against a superior who is in a position of influence (here in a doctor) in a Medical College requires extreme courage and mental strength and in the interest of justice, the case should proceed towards trial so that the parties have the opportunity to access the protection of justice."

Case Details:-

Dr Raunak Hajari @ Raunak Hajari & Anr v. The State of West Bengal & Anr

Case No. CRR : 505/2020

Share this News

Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy