Ajay Kumar Behra AND State of Karnataka,CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4074 OF 2024
FACTS: The relative of the victim lodged the first information against unknown person. Later, the statement of the victim under Section 161, Cr.PC was recorded and the petitioner was apprehended. The statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.PC by the learned Magistrate, wherein, the victim has stated that the petitioner being her neighbor came to her house asking for rod and when she opened the door, he barged into the house, threatened with a knife, assaulted her and committed penetrative sexual assault. Even though, she tried to escape from his clutches, she was not successful. However, she assaulted the petitioner with the cooker lid. The wound certificate issued by Vijayashree Hospital, Bengaluru shows the examination of the victim on the date of incident itself i.e., 15.11.2023, with a history of assault and noted three injuries, out of which, one injury was grievous in nature i.e., degloving injury over right side of head. On the very same day, the victim was shifted to the Victoria Hospital, Bengaluru. The wound certificate issued by the Victoria Hospital, discloses three injuries and it is opined that injury Nos.1 and 3 are grievous in nature i.e., tenderness, swelling over the left eye and laceration over the neck. The victim was also
subjected to medical examination at Vanivilas Hospital, Bengaluru to ascertain as to whether she was subjected to sexual assault by the petitioner. The Assistant Professor, Department of O.B.G., Vanivilas Hospital, Bengaluru examined the victim on 16.11.2023 at 1.00 a.m. and noted her physical condition. But strangely, neither the final opinion nor the provisional opinion was given. There is also no explanation as to why the opinion of the doctor was not given when such a serious allegations of committing sexual assault is made. As per the direction of the Court, The Assistant Professor, Department of O.B.G., Vanivilas Hospital, Bengaluru, who issued the medical report, appeared before the Court and produced another report pertaining to the victim, which contains the provisional opinion. There is absolutely no explanation as to why there are two reports, one with provisional report and another one without it. (Main issue missing from the facts)
Issue: Whether Section 184 of BNSS Should Be Amended To Mandate Medical Examination Of Adult Rape Victims By Female Practitioners Only?
Observation: The Karnataka High Court has urged the Central Government to amend Section 184 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) to provide that adult victims of rape be examined in hospitals by only female doctors, so as to protect their right to privacy. A single judge bench of Justice MG Uma directed the Central and State governments to ensure that till the amendment is brought, medical examination of rape victims is conducted only by or under the supervision of a female registered medical practitioner. Further it has directed authorities to educate and sensitise all the stakeholders viz., Police officials, Prosecutors, Doctors and other Medical Officials who respond to the victim including judicial officers on this aspect.
