Nisha PurohitContributing Author, Rightantra A crucial question of law emerges concerning the definition of “Rape” as contained under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”), as evidenced by the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013 (“Act of 2013”), that whether the term “Rape” as defined in the amended section 375 includes sexual assaults beyond penile penetration into vagina, urethra, anus, and mouth; the known orifices in the human body to which such penetration as imaginably possible.
0 Comments
Cheshta TaterCo-Founder, Rightantra Ever since the birth of the Internet, the Government and social activists have been engaged in an ardent attempt to end the production and dissemination of pornography on it, more particularly child pornography. Such attempts are enshrined in the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (“POCSO”) and the Information Technology Act, 2000 (“IT Act”). The Madras High Court recently granted anticipatory bail to a man accused of viewing child pornography. Read more about this case here.
Anushka MehtaCo-Founder, Rightantra As most students and lovers of history would know, most fundamental rights, especially Article 21 of the Indian Constitution have been liberally interpreted since the post-emergency period. The main objective behind this broad interpretation is to make the exercise of the right more meaningful, especially for the benefit of the downtrodden and voiceless strata in society.
One such instance of including smaller rights under the umbrella of a fundamental right was recently brought forward by the Madras High Court. In a matter that is presently being heard, a bench comprising Justices BV Nagaratha and J Khazi held that providing sanitary napkins to girl children and ensuring separate toilets for different genders would not only be an act of empowerment but also a step towards realising Article 21A, right to education. When can you consent to puberty blockers?: Bell v. Tavistock NHS Foundation (The United Kingdom)12/5/2020 Anushka MehtaCo-Founder, Rightantra The High Court of Justice in London, recently passed a landmark ruling in the legal action brought by Ms. Keira Bell (who identifies as Quincy Bell) against the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust (“NHS”), which undertakes the task of prescribing puberty suppressing drugs to persons under the age of 18 years who experience gender dysphoria.
Gender dysphoria (“GD”) is a condition where persons experience distress because of a mismatch between their perceived identity and their natal sex or the assigned gender. Khadija HetavkarContributing Author, Rightantra In a recent judgment in the case of Rohit Sharma v. State of Himachal Pradesh, the Himachal Pradesh High Court granted bail to a man accused of raping a minor girl based on the voluntary conduct of the minor girl in accompanying the man for intercourse on an earlier occasion, despite acknowledging her inability to consent to sexual intercourse.
Subsequent to the appeal arising out of the Division Bench hearing of the Bombay High Court case of Pintu Sonale v. State of Maharashtra, the Full Bench of the same decided that convicts under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (‘POCSO’) will not be granted parole under the the Maharashtra Prisons (Mumbai Furlough and Parole (Amendment) Rules, 2020 (‘Parole Rules, 2020’). Under these rules, convicts can be granted an emergency parole (due to the COVID-19 outbreak) in pursuance of the Epidemics Diseases Act, 1897.
Lily PooniaContributing Author, Rightantra Pursuant to the current worldwide situation, a peculiar but pertinent question has arisen in the Bombay High Court: whether a POCSO Convict would be granted parole under the Parole Rules 2020?
|
Categories
All
Archives
December 2021
|