सं Samvidhan

Indian Penal Code, 1860

Section 375

repealed

Rape

Why this exists

This section was substantially expanded after the 2012 Delhi gang rape case sparked nationwide outrage and led to the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, which broadened the definition of rape beyond penile-vaginal penetration to include oral, anal, and object-based penetration, and clarified that consent must be affirmative and can be withdrawn through lack of physical resistance not being treated as consent. It reflects an evolving understanding of sexual violence and consent, informed by the Justice Verma Committee report. The marital rape exception remains a subject of ongoing constitutional litigation and public debate. The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 largely retains this same definition and structure of rape under its corresponding provision.

How courts read it

The Supreme Court has held that the marital rape exception's minimum age (from fifteen to eighteen) was read up in the context of related provisions to protect minor wives, in Independent Thought v. Union of India (2017), which held that sexual intercourse with a wife under eighteen is rape regardless of marriage. Courts have also repeatedly emphasized that lack of physical resistance does not amount to consent, and that consent must be clear, voluntary, and specific to the act in question, not assumed from silence, a prior relationship, or past sexual history.

Common misconceptions
  • Myth: If a woman does not physically fight back or scream, it means she consented.
    Fact: The law explicitly states that a woman's lack of physical resistance to penetration does not, by itself, mean she consented; consent must be a clear, voluntary, communicated agreement.
  • Myth: Rape only refers to penile-vaginal intercourse.
    Fact: Since the 2013 amendment, this section defines rape broadly to include oral, anal, and object-based non-consensual penetration as well.