Skip to main content

Full text of "Medical Jurisprudence And Toxicology"

See other formats


4. During the year 1946 two cases occurred to Dr. G. B. Sahay at Purnea. In oiie
case a woman aged 22 years, complained to the police that she was raped by a yotmg
man in a field away from a village after she was overpowered by him. On examination
the doctor did not find any mark of injury on her genitals or on her body. The hymen
presented old tears suggesting that she had been used to sexual intercourse. On digital
examination he noticed a soft, tiny piece of an orange pip, which appeared to have been
transferred to the vagina during an attempt at lubricating her private parts with her
saliva. On examining her mouth he found a similar piece sticking on the gum of one of
her teeth. He also examined the alleged ravisher and did not find any evidence of
injury on his penis or on his person. On inquiry the man admitted that he had had
intimacy with the woman for some time and had had sexual intercourse with her after
both of them had eaten two oranges. At the instigation of his rival she brought a false
charge of rape against him. A woman, who tried to lubricate her private parts witli
her own saliva must have been a consenting party. The police reported the case as a
false one and released the man from their custody.

In the other case of an alleged rape by a man, 25 years old, on a girl, 15 years old,
the girl complained that she was overpowered and carried 3 miles on the rod of his
cycle, raped in a lonely field and brought back to her village 4 miles from the field. On
examination the girl showed signs of having been used to sexual intercourse, but had
no marks of recent injury on her genitals or on her body. The fact that the girl, sitting
on the rod, did allow the man to keep proper balance of his cycle for 7 miles was suffi-
cient proof that she was a willing partner and that she was used to such rides on a
cycle. The accused was acquitted.


This is carnal knowledge by a man with a woman who is closely related
to him "by blood, e.g. a daughter, granddaughter, sister, step-sister, niece,
aunt, mother or stepmother. This is prohibited in England and other
Western countries, and is regarded as a cognizable offence. Consent given
by the woman is no defence in a case of incest, and both the man and the
woman of and above the age of consent are punishable according to the law.

In India, cases of incest do occur, but the police cannot take cognizance
of such cases, as incest per se is not an offence, unless such sexual inter-
course can be brought into any of the penalizing sections of the Indian Penal
Code, such as sections 376 and 497. A case was brought to me in which the
wife complained that her husband was having sexual intercourse with his
stepdaughter, but no action was taken by the police as the act was done with
the consent of the girl, who happened to be above the age of consent.


gection 377 of the Indian. Penal Code treats of offences relating to carnal
intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal
(vide Appendix IV). Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal
intercourse necessary to the offences which are punishable with trans-
portation for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to ten years and also with fine. These offences may be
classified as sodomy, tribadism and bestiality.


"Blis is also called buggery, and means anal intercourse between mau
and man or between man and woman. It is termed psederasty, -when fee
passive agent is a young boy (catamitel^ In order that the offence of
sodomy be made punishable under section 52?, LP.C., it is necessary that
penetration; ^however little, should be proved strictly. Similarly an
to commit this offence is punishable under section 511, I.P.C., only
attempt was made to thrust the male organ into the anus of the
agent. A mere preparation, for ilie operation should not
construed as an attempt,11

11.   Sind J. C/s Conirt Crfrrim, Appeal N<x 122 of*1934 ; 36 Cr. L*m Jontv ,3981