The Tukaram v. State of Maharashtra (1979), popularly known as the Mathura Rape Case, is one of the most debated judgments under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It highlighted the flaws in the interpretation of consent under Section 375 IPC and the challenges of dealing with custodial rape cases. The Supreme Court’s acquittal of the accused policemen triggered a nationwide uproar, ultimately leading to the Criminal Law Amendment of 1983, which significantly reshaped rape laws in India.
Facts of the Case
-
Victim: Mathura, a 14–16 year-old tribal girl.
-
Incident: In 1972, Mathura was taken to a police station in Chandrapur, Maharashtra, for questioning. There, two policemen – Tukaram and Ganpat – allegedly raped her in custody.
-
Trial Court: Acquitted the policemen, reasoning that Mathura was “habituated to sex.”
-
Bombay High Court: Convicted the accused under Section 376 IPC.
-
Supreme Court (1979): Set aside the High Court decision and acquitted the accused.
Legal Issues Raised
-
What amounts to consent under Section 375 IPC?
-
Does lack of resistance equal consent?
-
Can the past sexual history of the victim be considered to deny her claim of rape?
Supreme Court’s Judgment
The Supreme Court acquitted the accused, holding that:
-
Mathura did not resist or raise an alarm, which suggested consent.
-
No evidence proved that intercourse occurred due to fear or threat.
-
Her past sexual history weakened her claim of non-consent.
Result: Both policemen were acquitted, sparking outrage across India.
Public Reaction and Nationwide Protest
The verdict faced severe criticism for being insensitive, patriarchal, and unjust. Women’s rights groups, activists, and legal scholars protested across the country. Eminent jurists wrote an open letter condemning the judgment, which led to one of the strongest legal reform movements in India.
Legal Reforms After Tukaram Case
The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1983 was passed as a direct consequence of this case. Key reforms included:
-
Section 114A, Indian Evidence Act: Courts must presume absence of consent if the woman states so in custodial rape cases.
-
Expanded Section 375 IPC: Provided a clearer and broader definition of rape and consent.
-
Amendments to Section 376 IPC: Stricter punishment, especially for custodial rape.
-
Introduction of Sections 376A-376D IPC: Covering custodial rape, marital rape during judicial separation, and gang rape.
Importance of the Tukaram Case in Indian Criminal Law
-
First major case to expose flaws in rape law interpretation under IPC.
-
Marked the rise of the women’s rights movement in India.
-
Showed the power of public opinion in shaping legal reforms.
-
Became a landmark reference point for discussions on consent and custodial rape.
Conclusion
The Tukaram case (Mathura Rape Case) remains a milestone in Indian criminal law. While the Supreme Court’s acquittal shocked the nation, it also set in motion critical reforms that redefined rape laws, consent, and custodial responsibility under the IPC.
Even today, this case is cited in legal studies, academic debates, and judicial training as a reminder of why sensitivity and gender justice are essential in criminal trials.