IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/indgen/v23y2016i2p260-285.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reading Rape Post Mathura

Author

Listed:
  • Monica Sakhrani

Abstract

The article looks at the changes post the Mathura rape case. Over the years, the law relating to rape has undergone several changes, but the question remains: has the law really changed? I look at judgments of the Supreme Court of India to argue that the same judicial reasoning used in the Mathura rape case are still valid today and the construction of consent/ non consent remains a contentious issue as the changes in the law have failed to address the issue of difference between passive submission and consent as well as the medicalization of consent. The article argues that the reason why changes in law have not led to change in the conviction rate is because the amendments to the rape law do not move away from this circular discourse of consent and non-consent as it is set by the stranglehold of the very structure of legal discourse and the impossibility of having a successful law reform by moving away from such discourse. The answer I suggest is in looking at the law relating to consent in cases other than rape, that is, in property and contract which are based on mutuality of intent. The article concludes by stating that the rape law needs reconstitution with the woman as the subject of the law and not its object.

Suggested Citation

  • Monica Sakhrani, 2016. "Reading Rape Post Mathura," Indian Journal of Gender Studies, Centre for Women's Development Studies, vol. 23(2), pages 260-285, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:indgen:v:23:y:2016:i:2:p:260-285
    DOI: 10.1177/0971521516635347
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0971521516635347
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0971521516635347?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:indgen:v:23:y:2016:i:2:p:260-285. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.