Aparna Bhat v. State of M.P.

By Sonika1
In the Supreme Court of India
NAME OF THE CASE Aparna Bhat v. State of M.P.
CITATION 2021 SCC OnLine SC 230
DATE OF JUDGEMENT March 18th, 2021
APPELLANTS Aparna Bhat and Others
RESPONDENTS State of Madhya Pradesh and Another
BENCH/JUDGE A.M. Khanwilkar and S. Ravindra Bhat
STATUES/CONSTITUTION Indian Penal Code, 1860
INVOLVED
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

Information Technology Act, 2000

Protection of Children from Sexual

Offences Act, 2012

SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,

1989
IMPORTANT SECTIONS/ARTICLES Indian Penal Code, 1860- Sections 323,
354, 354A, 376, 452, 506

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-

Sections 437(3), 438

Information Technology Act, 2000-

Sections 66-B, 67

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled

Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989- Sections 3(1) (w), 3(2)(V), 3(2)
(v-a)

1
Author is a 3rd semester student of Amity Law School, Lucknow.
 ABSTRACT
The appellants are public-spirited individuals who are apprehensive about the negative
precedent set by the imposition of certain bail conditions in a case involving a sexual
offence against a woman. In this case, they challenge a part of the Madhya Pradesh
High Court’s verdict that imposed some questionable bail conditions on the accused.
The brief facts of the case are that on 20.04.2020 at about 2.30 a.m., the accused, a
neighbour of the complainant, entered her residence and caught hold of the
complainant's hand, allegedly attempting to sexually harass her. A complaint was
registered at the Police Station, Bhatpachlana, District-Ujjain, for the offences
punishable under sections 452, 354A, 323 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. A charge
sheet was filed once the case was investigated. The accused filed an application under
Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking pre-arrest bail. The High
Court, by the impugned order, while granting bail to the applicant, imposed some
conditions which are challenged in this petition.2

INTRODUCTION
The United Nations Organisation has defined “violence against women” as "any act
of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual, or
psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or
arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or private life.”3
Violence against women shall be understood to include but not be limited to physical,
sexual, and psychological violence occurring in the family, including battering, sexual
abuse of female children in their household, dowry-related violence, marital rape, and
female genital mutilation, and other traditional practices harmful to women, non-
spousal violence, and violence related to exploitation. Physical, sexual, and
psychological violence occurs within the general community, including rape, sexual
abuse, sexual harassment and intimidation at work, in educational institutions, and
elsewhere, trafficking in women, and forced prostitution. Physical, sexual, and
psychological violence perpetrated or condoned by the State; physical, verbal, or other
acts that threaten or give them acute discomfort, undermining their dignity, self-worth,
and respect; or is to silence or subdue the survivor. The State, wherever it occurs, must
bear the full brunt of the violence against women.4
Section 354 of the IPC “criminalises any act by a person that assaults or uses criminal
force against a woman with the intention or knowledge that it will outrage her
modesty. Such an act is punishable with either simple or rigorous imprisonment of up
to 2 years, or a fine, or both”.5

2
2021 SCC Online SC 230.
3
WHO, https://www.who.int/health-topics/violence-against-women# (Last visited July 7, 2022).
4
Joanne Conaghan, Law and Gender (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013) at 113.
5
Safecity, https://www.safecity.in/sexual-violence-laws-under-the-indian-penal-code/# (Last visited July 7,
2022).
The term "bail" isn’t defined in the Criminal Procedure Code. In general, bail is
described as the procedure of releasing an accused in exchange for a quantity of
money and a promise that they will appear in court in the future. Bail is considered to
be an individual right accorded by the Constitution under Article 21.
Anticipatory bails are issued before a person is arrested. It’s also known as a pre-arrest
bail. It is referred to as 'grant apprehending arrest' in Section 438 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.

FACTS OF THE CASE

 The accused is a neighbour of the complainant, Sarda Bai. He intruded into her
house and attempted to sexually harass her. The complainant filed an FIR for
the offences punishable under sections 4526, 354A7, 3238, and 5069 of the
Indian Penal Code. A charge sheet was filed once the case was investigated.
 The accused applied for anticipatory bail under Section 438 10 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
 The High Court, while granting bail, imposed certain conditions on the accused
which are being challenged in this case.
 The conditions were that the accused was instructed to visit the victim, Sarda
Bai's house along with his wife. He had to bring a Rakhi thread/band along
with a box of sweets and had to request the complainant to tie the Rakhi and
promise to protect her. He must also pay Rs. 11,000/-to the complainant as a
customary ritual on the occasion of Raksha Bandhan and ask for her blessings.
The applicant should additionally submit Rs. 5,000/-to the complainant's son,
Vishal, for the purchase of clothing and sweets.11
 A petition was filed by Advocate Aparna Bhat and eight other advocates in
response to a questionable order issued by the Madhya Pradesh High Court on
July 30 ordering the man accused of sexual assault to visit the victim's home on
the occasion of Raksha Bandhan with a Rakhi and get it tied by her as a
condition of bail.12
 The Court reviewed a variety of rulings from various courts involving sexual
assault that demonstrated archaic gender beliefs, gender stereotyping, and
insensitivity towards the victims of sexual assault.

6
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 452.
7
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 354A.
8
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 323.
9
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 506.
10
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 438.
11
Supra note 2.
12
Vishalakshi, Aparna Bhat v/s State Of Madhya Pradesh, Legal Service India (July 7, 2022, 4:00 PM),
https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-5587-aparna-bhat-v-s-state-of-madhya-pradesh.html.
 ISSUES RAISED BEFORE THE COURT
 Can a compromise be reached between the accused and the victim in these
cases?
 Do such orders constitute unfair trial procedures?
 Are such court orders acceptable, and if so, what effect would such rulings
have on our society?
 Should the accused be allowed to meet the victim or any of her family
members or acquaintances?
 What are the guidelines that should be followed by the courts when granting
bails or anticipatory bails to the accused?

ARGUMENTS FROM THE APPELLANT’S SIDE

 Learned counsel for the appellants challenged the negative precedent being set
by the bail conditions being set by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in a case
involving sexual assault.
 The appellants brought to the notice of the court various similar cases and
decisions where the courts and judges made questionable observations about
the victims of sexual assault or violence.
 The appellants stated that in many cases, particularly under the POCSO Act,
the courts granted bail on the grounds that the accused and prosecutrix had
reached an agreement to marry. Furthermore, they said that when hearing cases
of sexual harassment and rape, judges made alarming statements about the
prosecutrix's character.13
 Petitioners cite State of M.P v. Madanlal14 and argued that in cases of sexual
offences, the idea of compromise, particularly marriage between the accused
and the prosecutrix, is detestable and should not be considered a judicial
remedy.
 The appellants submitted that no observation or condition should be made
which grants bails on the assumption that the victim is of "loose character" or
"habituated to sexual intercourse." This was observed in the case Vikas Garg v.
State of Haryana15 by the High Court of Punjab.
 The appellants reference Kunal Kumar Tiwari v. State of Bihar 16 and Sumit
Mehta v. State (NCT of Delhi)17 and claim that the judgment made by the

13
Supra note 2.
14
State of M.P v. Madanlal, (2015) 7 SCC 681.
15
Vikas Garg v. State of Haryana, (2014) SCC Online P&H 698.
16
Kunal Kumar Tiwari v. State of Bihar, (2018) 16 SCC 74.
17
Sumit Mehta v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2013) 15 SCC 570.
 respective courts in both of these cases must be adopted by all courts while
evaluating and dealing with bail applications.

SUGGESTIONS FROM THE INTERVENORS

 Counsel for the Intervenors contended that the power to impose conditions has
been conveyed in broad terms under sections 437(2) and 438 by using the
phrase "any condition." Recently, the High Courts have begun imposing
irrelevant conditions on bails granted under these clauses.
 The Intervenors also submitted that the Court cannot act as a social reformer or
charity fundraiser while ruling on a bail application and imposing conditions
that have no connection with the offense or are relevant to the object of the bail
provisions.18
 They urged the Court to issue guidelines/directions on gender sensitization of
the bar and bench, especially in judicial empathy towards the prosecutrix.
 The learned Attorney General, who had been issued a notice in this case,
submitted remarks in support of the appeal. He filed a detailed note suggesting
the steps that should be taken to educate and sensitize all stakeholders,
particularly courts and judges, when dealing with crimes against women.19

RELATED PROVISIONS/SECTIONS
o Indian Penal Code, 1860

Section 323: - Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt. —Whoever, except in

the case provided for by Section 334, voluntarily causes hurt, shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one
year, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.20

Section 354: - Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her
modesty. —Whoever assaults or uses criminal force to any woman, intending
to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby outrage her modesty,
shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which
shall not be less than one year but which may extend to five years, and shall
also be liable to fine.21

Section 354-A: - Sexual harassment and punishment for sexual harassment. —

(1) A man committing any of the following acts—

18
Indian Kanoon, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/13024806/ (Last visited July 8, 2022).
19
Id.
20
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 323.
21
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 354.
 (i) physical contact and advances involving unwelcome and explicit sexual
overtures; or
(ii) a demand or request for sexual favours; or
(iii) showing pornography against the will of a woman; or
(iv) making sexually coloured remarks,
shall be guilty of the offence of sexual harassment.22

(2) Any man who commits the offence specified in clause (i) or clause (ii) or
clause (iii) of sub-section (1) shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for
a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.23

(3) Any man who commits the offence specified in clause (iv) of sub-section
(1) shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which
may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.24

Section 376: - Punishment for rape. —

(1) Whoever, except in the cases provided for in sub-section (2), commits rape,
shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment of either description for a term
which shall not be less than ten years, but which may extend to imprisonment
for life, and shall also be liable to fine.25

(2) Whoever, —

(a) being a police officer, commits rape—

(i) within the limits of the police station to which such police officer is
appointed; or
(ii) in the premises of any station house; or
(iii) on a woman in such police officer's custody or in the custody of a police
officer subordinate to such police officer; or26

(b) being a public servant, commits rape on a woman in such public servant's
custody or in the custody of a public servant subordinate to such public servant;
or27

(c) being a member of the armed forces deployed in an area by the Central or a
State Government commits rape in such area; or28

(d) being on the management or on the staff of a jail, remand home or other
place of custody established by or under any law for the time being in force or
22
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 354-A (1).
23
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 354-A (2).
24
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 354-A (3).
25
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 376(1).
26
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 376(2)(a).
27
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 376(2)(b).
28
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 376(2)(c).
 of a women's or children's institution, commits rape on any inmate of such jail,
remand home, place or institution; or29

(e) being on the management or on the staff of a hospital, commits rape on a

woman in that hospital; or30

(f) being a relative, guardian or teacher of, or a person in a position of trust or

authority towards the woman, commits rape on such woman; or31

(g) commits rape during communal or sectarian violence; or32

(h) commits rape on a woman knowing her to be pregnant; or33

(i) [* * *] Omitted by Act 22 of 2018

(j) commits rape, on a woman incapable of giving consent; or34

(k) being in a position of control or dominance over a woman, commits rape on

such woman; or35

(l) commits rape on a woman suffering from mental or physical disability; or36

(m) while committing rape causes grievous bodily harm or maims or disfigures
or endangers the life of a woman; or37

(n) commits rape repeatedly on the same woman,38

shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less
than ten years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, which shall
mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person's natural life, and shall
also be liable to fine.

(3) Whoever, commits rape on a woman under sixteen years of age shall be
punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than
twenty years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, which shall mean
imprisonment for the remainder of that person's natural life, and shall also be
liable to fine: Provided that such fine shall be just and reasonable to meet the

29
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 376(2)(d).
30
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 376(2)(e).
31
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 376(2)(f).
32
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 376(2)(g).
33
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 376(2)(h).
34
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 376(2)(j).
35
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 376(2)(k).
36
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 376(2)(l).
37
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 376(2)(m).
38
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 376(2)(n).
 medical expenses and rehabilitation of the victim: Provided further that any
fine imposed under this sub-section shall be paid to the victim.39

Section 452: - House-trespass after preparation for hurt, assault or wrongful

restraint. —Whoever commits house-trespass, having made preparation for
causing hurt to any person or for assaulting any person, or for wrongfully
restraining any person, or for putting any person in fear of hurt, or of assault, or
of wrongful restraint, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description
for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.40

Section 506: - Punishment for criminal intimidation. —Whoever commits the

offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with
both;
if threat be to cause death or grievous hurt, etc.—and if the threat be to cause
death or grievous hurt, or to cause the destruction of any property by fire, or to
cause an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life, or with
imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, or to impute
unchastity to a woman, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with
both.41

o Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

Section 437(3): -
(3) When a person accused or suspected of the commission of an offence
punishable with imprisonment which may extend to seven years or more or of
an offence under Chapter VI, Chapter XVI or Chapter XVII of the Indian Penal
Code,1860 or abetment of, or conspiracy or attempt to commit, any such
offence, is released on bail under sub-section (1), the Court shall impose the
conditions,42 —

(a) that such person shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond
executed under this Chapter,43

(b) that such person shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which
he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected,
and44

(c) that such person shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat
or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to
39
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 376(3).
40
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 452.
41
Indian Penal Code, 1860, § 506.
42
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 437(3).
43
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 437(3)(a).
44
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 437(3)(b).
 dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer
or tamper with the evidence,45
and may also impose, in the interests of justice, such other conditions as it
considers necessary.

Section 438: - Direction for grant of bail to person apprehending arrest. —

(1) Where any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on
accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the
High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section that in the
event of such arrest he shall be released on bail; and that Court may, after
taking into consideration, inter alia, the following factors, namely: —
(i) the nature and gravity of the accusation;46
(ii) the antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether
he has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a
Court in respect of any cognizable offence;47
(iii) the possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; and48
(iv) where the accusation has been made with the object of injuring or
humiliating the applicant by having him so arrested,49

either reject the application forthwith or issue an interim order for the grant of
anticipatory bail:
Provided that, where the High Court or, as the case may be, the Court of
Session, has not passed any interim order under this sub-section or has rejected
the application for grant of anticipatory bail, it shall be open to an officer in-
charge of a police station to arrest, without warrant the applicant on the basis of
the accusation apprehended in such application.50

(1-A) Where the Court grants an interim order under sub-section (1), it shall
forthwith cause a notice being not less than seven days notice, together with a
copy of such order to be served on the Public Prosecutor and the
Superintendent of Police, with a view to give the Public Prosecutor a
reasonable opportunity of being heard when the application shall be finally
heard by the Court.51

(1-B) The presence of the applicant seeking anticipatory bail shall be

obligatory at the time of final hearing of the application and passing of final
order by the Court, if on an application made to it by the Public Prosecutor, the
Court considers such presence necessary in the interest of justice.52
45
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 437(3)(c).
46
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 438(1)(i).
47
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 438(1)(ii).
48
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 438(1)(iii).
49
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 438(1)(iv).
50
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 438(1).
51
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 438(1) (1-A).
52
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 438(1) (1-B).
 (2) When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub-
section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the
facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including—
(i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation
by a police officer as and when required;53
(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of
the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or
to any police officer;54
(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous
permission of the court;55
(iv) such other condition as may be imposed under sub-section (3) of Section
437, as if the bail were granted under that section.56

(3) If such person is thereafter arrested without warrant by an officer in charge

of a police station on such accusation, and is prepared either at the time of
arrest or at any time while in the custody of such officer to give bail, he shall be
released on bail; and if a Magistrate taking cognizance of such offence decides
that a warrant should issue in the first instance against that person, he shall
issue a bailable warrant in conformity with the direction of the Court under
sub-section (1).57

(4) Nothing in this section shall apply to any case involving the arrest of any
person on accusation of having committed an offence under sub-section (3) of
Section 376 or Section 376-AB or Section 376-DA or Section 376-DB of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860.58

o Information Technology Act, 2000

Section 66-B: - Punishment for dishonestly receiving stolen computer resource

or communication device. —Whoever dishonestly receives or retains any
stolen computer resource or communication device knowing or having reason
to believe the same to be stolen computer resource or communication device,
shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to three years or with fine which may extend to rupees one lakh or with
both.59

Section 67:- Punishment for publishing or transmitting obscene material in

electronic form.—Whoever publishes or transmits or causes to be published or
53
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 438(2)(i).
54
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 438(2)(ii).
55
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 438(2)(iii).
56
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 438(2)(iv).
57
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 438(3).
58
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 438(4).
59
Information Technology Act, 2000, § 66-B.
 transmitted in the electronic form, any material which is lascivious or appeals
to the prurient interest or if its effect is such as to tend to deprave and corrupt
persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see
or hear the matter contained or embodied in it, shall be punished on first
conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to three years and with fine which may extend to five lakh rupees and in
the event of second or subsequent conviction with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to five years and also with fine which
may extend to ten lakh rupees.60

o Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,

1989

Section 3(1) (w): -

Section 3- Punishments for offences of atrocities. — (1) Whoever, not being a

member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, —

(w) (i) intentionally touches a woman belonging to a Scheduled Caste or a

Scheduled Tribe, knowing that she belongs to a Scheduled Caste or a
Scheduled Tribe, when such act of touching is of a sexual nature and is without
the recipient's consent;61

(ii) uses words, acts or gestures of a sexual nature towards a woman belonging
to a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, knowing that she belongs to a
Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe.62

Section 3(2)(v) & (v-a): -

Section 3- Punishments for offences of atrocities. — (2) Whoever, not being a

member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, —
(v) commits any offence under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 punishable with
imprisonment for a term of ten years or more against a person or property
knowing that such person is a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled
Tribe or such property belongs to such member, shall be punishable with
imprisonment for life and with fine;63
(v-a) commits any offence specified in the Schedule, against a person or
property, knowing that such person is a member of a Scheduled Caste or a
Scheduled Tribe or such property belongs to such member, shall be punishable

60
Information Technology Act, 2000, § 67.
61
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, § 3(1) (w-i).
62
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, § 3(1) (w-ii).
63
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, § 3(2) (v).
 with such punishment as specified under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for such
offences and shall also be liable to fine.64

JUDGMENT
The bench stated that in rape and sexual assault cases, no compromise may be reached
or even considered since it would be against the honour of the victim. Courts and
other law enforcement authorities are expected to be unbiased and are responsible for
ensuring fair conduction of the trial by being impartial and neutral. Such negative
approaches in rape and sexual assault trials would damage the survivor’s faith in the
fairness and impartiality of the courts.
The Court held that use of reasoning or language that undermines the offence and
seeks to belittle the survivor should be avoided in all situations.
In the circumstances of sexual offences, the notion of compromise, particularly
marriage between the accused and the prosecutrix, should not be considered, since any
such attempt would be disrespectful to the woman's dignity.65
At various stages, judgments establish precedents that are adopted by society at large.
By the Courts orders such as tying Rakhi on the wrist of the accused converts the
molesters into brothers, reducing and weakening the charge of sexual harassment. As
a result, under all circumstances, the use of reasoning/language that reduces the crime
and seeks to belittle the survivor should be avoided.66
By using Rakhi tying as a bail requirement, a molester is transformed into a brother
through a judicial mandate. This is completely inappropriate, as it dilutes and
diminishes the offence of sexual harassment.
S. Ravindra Bhat, J.: —
“A woman cannot be herself in the society of the present day, which is an exclusively
masculine society, with laws framed by men and with a judicial system that judges
feminine conduct from a masculine point of view.”67
The court issued the following directives after establishing several guidelines:
 Contact between the accused and the complainant or her acquaintances should
never be authorised as a condition for bail, and if bail is granted, the
complainant should be informed promptly, along with a copy of the bail order
delivered to her within two days.

64
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, § 3(2) (v-a).
65
Supra note 2.
66
Supra note 18.
67
Supra note 2.
  Any offer for a compromise between the accused and victim, such as getting
married or mandating mediation, shouldn’t be entertained.
 Judges must ensure that nothing they say undermines the Court's impartiality or
justice, and they must remain sensitive to the complainant's anguish.
 In terms of the training and sensitization of judges and attorneys, including
public prosecutors, the court ordered that a gender sensitization module must
be incorporated as part of every judge's foundational training.
 Every High Court will develop, with the assistance of competent experts, a
module on judicial sensitivity towards sexual offences that will be tested in the
Judicial Services Examination.
 The National Judicial Academy has also been urged to incorporate gender
sensitization into young judge training as soon as feasible.
 Similarly, the Bar Council of India was mandated to incorporate gender
sanitization in the LL.B. curriculum and as a mandatory topic in the All-India
Bar Examination syllabus.68

CONCLUSION
The historic decision outlawed arbitrary bail terms, which can negatively affect and
further traumatize the victim. It also investigated the limitations of Section 438 of the
CrPC, the impact such irresponsible restrictions imposed by the courts have on the
victims, and discussed other cases in which the courts had treated the victims unfairly
or with a bias.
Whatever the judges say becomes precedent, which is subsequently followed by lesser
courts in their judgments. Therefore, judges must exercise extreme caution when
making any comment that impacts the fundamental foundation of the judiciary and
people's faith. In situations involving women's bodies, particularly sexual offences,
even minor errors in judgment or statements made by the courts can result in grave
offences against the survivors.69
In my opinion, the judgment made by the Supreme Court is a progressive step toward
humanizing the survivors of sexual assault and treating them with respect and dignity.
By delivering this judgment and expressing regret for the paternalistic and sexist
attitudes displayed in past court rulings, the Supreme Court has kindled optimism for
the healthy progress of our society. The guidelines and regulations laid down by the
Supreme Court will help fight judicial bias/stereotyping and act as a deterrent for all
courts and judges from delivering such judgments in the future.

68
Supra note 12.
69
Id.