Get Updates
Get notified of breaking news, exclusive insights, and must-see stories!

Ejaculation Alone Not Rape, Rules Chhattisgarh HC; Conviction Reduced

The Chhattisgarh High Court has ruled that ejaculation without penetration amounts to an attempt to commit rape and not the offence of rape itself, while modifying a conviction in a case dating back over two decades.

Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas delivered the judgement on February 16 while hearing an appeal against a 2005 trial court order that had sentenced the accused to seven years in prison for rape.

AI Summary

AI-generated summary, reviewed by editors

The Chhattisgarh High Court, on February 16, ruled that ejaculation without penetration constitutes an attempt to commit rape, modifying a 2005 trial court decision related to a 2004 incident; the court reduced the sentence from seven years to three and a half years.
Ejaculation Alone Not Rape Rules Chhattisgarh HC Conviction Reduced

The case relates to a 2004 incident. The trial court had earlier concluded that the accused had engaged in sexual intercourse against the victim's will. However, during cross-examination, the victim stated that the accused had placed his private part over her vagina but had not penetrated it.

Clarifying the legal position, the High Court observed that penetration is the essential requirement to establish the offence of rape. "The sine qua non of the offence of rape is penetration, and not ejaculation. Ejaculation without penetration constitutes an attempt to commit rape and not actual rape," the court noted.

The court further explained that even slight penetration would be sufficient to constitute rape under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, but there must be clear and convincing evidence showing that some part of the male organ entered the woman's labia.

In this case, medical evidence showed that the victim's hymen was intact. The examining doctor noted redness and white discharge but could not give a definite opinion confirming rape, stating only that partial penetration was a possibility.

The High Court also pointed out inconsistencies in the victim's statements. While she had initially indicated penetration, she later clarified that there was no penetration.

Observing that rape was not proved beyond reasonable doubt, the court altered the conviction to attempt to commit rape. Consequently, it reduced the sentence from seven years to three years and six months.

The court held that the accused's actions had gone beyond preparation and constituted an attempt to commit rape under Section 511 read with Section 375 of the IPC, as applicable at the time of the offence.

Notifications
Settings
Clear Notifications
Notifications
Use the toggle to switch on notifications
  • Block for 8 hours
  • Block for 12 hours
  • Block for 24 hours
  • Don't block
Gender
Select your Gender
  • Male
  • Female
  • Others
Age
Select your Age Range
  • Under 18
  • 18 to 25
  • 26 to 35
  • 36 to 45
  • 45 to 55
  • 55+