The Madhya Pradesh High Court has affirmed that both men and women can be held liable for abetment to rape under Section 109 of the IPC and punished. The Court was examining a Criminal Revision Petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. in contrast to the order passed by an Additional Sessions Judge wherein charges under Section 376 read with Sections 34, 190 and 506-II of IPC that were filed against the Applicants. This ruling highlights the principle that any individual, irrespective of gender, who aids or abets the commission of rape can be prosecuted and punished accordingly.
Comprehending Abetment Under the IPC
In 2022, the prosecutrix filed a complaint at the Police Station claiming that the co-accused lived in her neighbourhood. Thus, she had familiarity with him. In 2021, the co-accused approached her at her house and propositioned marriage to her, and she agreed to the proposal. When the prosecutrix went to the residence of the co-accused and consented to marriage, the Applicants, by force, closeted the prosecutrix with the co-accused and shut the door wherein he entered into a physically intimate relationship with her.
Subsequently, the prosecutrix and the co-accused exchanged their rings in a hotel, and she was promised marriage, and on that pretext, the co-accused again got physically intimate with her. Later, the mother of the prosecutrix passed away due to cancer; subsequently, the Applicants declined to get the co-accused to marry her.
Judicial Precedents and Interpretations
Abetment, as defined under Section 107 of the IPC, consists of instigating, engaging in a conspiracy, or deliberately assisting in the commission of an offense. Section 109 prescribes punishment for abetment when no specific provision is made for its punishment. In the context of rape, this means that any person who facilitates or encourages such act can be held responsible as an abettor. In this regard, both men and women can be held liable.
The judiciary has always interpreted the provisions of abetment to comprise any person who has a role in the crime being committed. For example, in the case of Smt. Poorva Goyal & Another v. The State Of Madhya Pradesh, the High Court opined that a woman can be held accountable for abetment to rape under Section 109 IPC, highlighting that abetment is a separate and distinctive offense from rape itself.
The Observations of the Court
Subsequently, on behalf of the Applicants, an application was filed under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. to discharge them from this case; however, it was dismissed, and the trial court drew up charges against the Applicants under Section 376 read with Sections 34, 506-II and 190 of IPC which was objected to in the revision application. The counsel for the Applicants contended that the prosecutrix and the co-accused had a love relationship and hence, there was no offence under Section 376 of IPC to be made out against the co-accused and thus, the charges were liable to be dismissed. They relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mahesh Damu Khare Vs. The State of Maharashtra. However, the Counsel for the State presented that specific allegation were made against the Applicants with regard to the abetment of rape and the trial Court rightly passed the order.
Implications of the Ruling
This judgment, which made clear that both men and women can be held liable, has significant consequences for the legal system and society at large:
- Gender Neutrality in Criminal Liability: The ruling highlights the perception that criminal liability is not restricted by gender. It determines that anyone, irrespective of being male or female, who facilitates the commission of rape can be prosecuted.
- Deterrence Against Complicity: By holding all persons liable for their roles in facilitating such heinous crimes, the judgment serves as a deterrent against collusion and encourages societal responsibility.
- Clarification of Legal Provisions: The judgment is transparent on the application of Sections 107 and 109 IPC, which ensure that abetment laws are applied consistently without gender bias.
Conclusion
The Madhya Pradesh High Court’s affirmation that both men and women can be held liable for abetment to rape under Section 109 IPC is a crucial step in ensuring comprehensive accountability in the legal system. The judgment strengthens the principle that aiding or abetting a crime is a punishable offense, regardless of the abettor’s gender. It serves as a reminder that the law does not discriminate and that all individuals have a duty to prevent and refrain from facilitating criminal acts.
About Author
Ananda Murthy JS is an English teacher in Hyderabad. His teaching experience spans more than 30 years, which includes his stint as an IGCSE teacher in the Maldives, lecturer in English for Intermediate students, writer and editor/language specialist, and IELTS, GRE and TOEFL trainer. He also provides English coaching to students appearing for CAT, IELTS, GRE and TOEFL privately in Hyderabad. Ananda has proficiency in editing SWOT analyses, market forecast and other reports, conducting Effective English sessions, and imparting training in Business English. He also write business blogs, key word dense articles and original articles on various topics.