Vrinda Grover, Facebook
“We would like to clearly state that in a case of rape or attempt of rape, the conception of compromise under no circumstances can really be thought of. These are crimes against the body of a woman which is her own temple.
These are offences which suffocate the breath of life and sully the reputation. And reputation, needless to emphasise, is the richest jewel one can conceive of in life. No one would allow it to be extinguished. When a human frame is defiled, the “purest treasure”, is lost.
Dignity of a woman is a part of her non-perishable and immortal self and no one should ever think of painting it in clay. There cannot be a compromise or settlement as it would be against her honour which matters the most. It is sacrosanct.
Sometimes solace is given that the perpetrator of the crime has acceded to enter into wedlock with her which is nothing but putting pressure in an adroit manner; and we say with emphasis that the Courts are to remain absolutely away from this subterfuge to adopt a soft approach to the case, for any kind of liberal approach has to be put in the compartment of spectacular error. Or to put it differently, it would be in the realm of a sanctuary of error.
We are compelled to say so as such an attitude reflects lack of sensibility towards the dignity, the elan vital, of a woman. Any kind of liberal approach or thought of mediation in this regard is thoroughly and completely sans legal permissibility.”
-The woman’s right to bodily integrity stems from constitutional rights, human rights and not conservative notions of reputation, chastity, honour, dignity.
Compromise in rape cases is prohibited by law.
It is important for Supreme Court, and all other courts to premise their decisions on legal reasoning and not because they are kindly or charitably disposed towards women.
Recent judgments of the courts make a compelling case for an urgent dialogue on the constitutional and human right to equality, rights of women and sexual violence, across the legal system.