Writ Petn. (Cri.) No. 33 of 1997. Case: Sakshi Vs Union of India and others. Uttarakhand High Court Supreme Court Case

Case NumberWrit Petn. (Cri.) No. 33 of 1997
JudgesDr. A. S. Anand, C.J.I. and Mrs. Sujata Manohar, J. and B. N. Kirpal, J.
IssuePenal Code (45 of 1860) - Section 375, Section 376
CitationAIR 1999 SCW 4827
Judgement DateAugust 09, 1999
CourtUttarakhand High Court Supreme Court Case


  1. The attention of the Court was drawn to existing Ss.375/376, Indian Penal Code and various other sections and it was pointed out that the interpretation being placed by the Courts on those sections cannot be said to be in tune with the current state of affairs existing in the society, particularly in the matter of sexual abuse of children.

  2. On 13th of January, 1998, after an affidavit had been filed by Mrs. G. Mukherjee, Director, Ministry of Home Affairs stating that the Government of India had commenced the process for "examination of the issues raised in this writ petition" by referring the matter to the Law Commission and that the report/recommendation of the Law Commission relating to amendment of the Indian Penal Code were awaited, we requested the Law Commission, in view of the importance of the matter, to examine the issues raised in the petition and to intimate to this Court its views and proposed action to be taken in that behalf.

  3. 156th Report of the Law Commission had been submitted to the Government of India on 30th August, 1997. The Law Commission referred to the same report and an affidavit was filed in this Court by an Additional Law Officer of the Law Commission wherein it was pointed out that 156th Report of the Law Commission of India on amendments of the Indian Penal Code had been laid on the Table of both Houses of Parliament on 8th June, 1998 and 9th June, 1998 and that issues raised in the writ petition had been considered therein. Reference was invited to Chapter IX, Part V entitled "Child Sexual Abuse" and to the observations of the Law Commission in para 9.59 of that Report in that behalf.

  4. Mr. F. S. Nariman, learned senior counsel submits that what was contained in the 156th Report of the Law Commission was known to the petitioners, but since according to him that Report did not deal with the precise issues raised in the writ petition, a request was made to seek further consideration of the issues by the Law Commission and the Government of India. The submission appears to be correct. The report had been submitted by the Law Commission prior to the issues being referred to it. The Report of the Law...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT