Definition of Rape Under IPC needs to be redefined.

Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code defines rape. A man is said to commit rape against woman when he has sexual intercourse with such woman under the following circumstances.
1. Against her will.
 2. Against her consent.
 3. With her consent when consent is obtained under threat.
 4. With her consent when woman believes that, he is her husband.
 5. With her consent when the consent was given under influence of drugs or alcohol.
 6. With or without her consent when she is under the age of 16 years.
 Penetration is sufficient to constitute rape. Sexual intercourse by husband with his own wife who is not less than 15 years of age does not amount to rape.

The first law commission drafted IPC during the British rule in India in 1830 decade under the chairperson of Lord Macaulay. Now much of water has flown during these years in the society but the definition of rape remains unchanged that has caused considerable gap between the law and society that is not healthy sign of legal system. Values of the society have undergone sea changes and there is development of diversity of sexual offences against woman. In the light of all these things, the rape definition suffers from serious flaws.

 1 .Narrow definition—Rape defined in the 1830 decade has become out dated in the 21 century. Now days the jurisprudence of sex has widened and it is enjoyed in more diversified manners. Man has invented new methods of Anal and Oral sex to commit sexual offence against woman. Most of western countries have included these things in the definition of rape but it has not happened in India. Even finger sex and some time foreign objects are put into the vagina parts of woman, have become common routine to commit sexual offence against woman. There fore word rape must replace by the sexual offence that would include all these things that makes the definition of rape meaningful and complete.
2. Gender biased definition—Section 375 says that only man can commit rape against woman that is major deficiency of rape. Today in most of the inmate of male prisons, commit anal sex against their own male counter part. Moreover, the child offenders are sexually abused by means anal sex. Even the woman can enjoys the finger sex against another woman or she can put some hard objects into the vagina another woman. All these things suggest that woman against woman or man against man can commit rape under widened definition of rape. Therefore, the definition of rape needs defined neutrally not in reference with male gender.
 3. Marital Rape---Husband is exempted from the offence of rape when he has forcible sex with his own who is not less than 15 years age. Section 375 makes inference that woman is commodity, goods or property of husband and she has to please the sex of husband whenever he demands. If wife refuses to have sex then husband can use force and he can fulfill his lust that would not amounts rape. This section gives blanket power to husband use his wife as sex objects under any circumstances without considering her health. It is era of equality and woman does not loose her identity even after the marriage. Woman should be accepted as human being rather than sex objects. Therefore, whenever husband wants to have sex with his wife then it must with her consent otherwise it should be treated as rape.
4. Less punishment--- whenever husband has forcible sex with his own wife who is less than 15 years and more than 12 years age amounts to rape and punishable with only 2 years. Wife who is living separately under judicial separation or custom. Under such circumstance the forcible sex by husband amount to rape, which is punishable with 2 years imprisonment only. In other cases of rape, minimum punishment is 7 years. These provisions make inference that rape by husband is less serious than rape by stranger that is ironic and it should have been other way. Forcible sex by husband is betrayal of mutual trust and protector himself becomes offenders that cause considerable pain and agony for woman more than rape by stranger.

Difference between Culpable Homicide and Murder.

Section 299 defines Culpable Homicide.

Whoever causes death by doing an act with,

1. Intention of causing death.
2. Intentionally causing bodily injury which is likely to cause death.
3. Doing act with knowledge that it is likely to cause death.

Section 300 defines Murder.

Whoever causes death by doing an act with.

1. Intention  of causing death.
2.  Causing such bodily injury as the offender knows it is likely to cause death of person.
3. Intentionally causing bodily injury which is sufficient to cause death.
4. Doing act with knowledge that it is  so imminently dangerous and in all probability causes death.

The question is when death of man is to be treated as culpable homicide or murder. there is thin difference between the murder and culpable homicide.why this difference is important because the culpable homicide carries maximum punishment of life imprisonment and  where as murder carries death sustenance. 2 and 3 Ingrident of 299 and 3 and 4 of 300 difference is on apparent. read the marked words the difference would be noticed. if the death of the person is more than survival then it is murder. On the other hand death is likely, means survival and death are in the same proportionate, then it is culpable homicide. it depends upon what kind of weapon offender has used and where the injuries are caused.suppose the offender has used the sharp weapon and struck on the vital part of body, naturally the injury is sufficent to cause the death and offender has the knowledge that his act is imminent danger and in all probable death is  bound to occur. This kind of death is called Murder. On the other hand, where the blunt and hard weapon like stick and stone are used and injuries are caused on the hard part of the body. In such cases the death is likely rather than probable, therefore it is culpable homicide and not murder.

The most  confusing aspect is 1st ingredient of both definition because in both definition  there is intention cause death. In both culpable homicide and murder the death is always caused intentionally, then how you can make the difference. Here you have to consider the degree of intention of the offenders. if person is killed in cold blooded manner or with well  planed then it is murder because the intention to kill is in high degree. On the other hand the person is killed without pre planed, in sudden fight or in sudden anger because of some ones provocation or instigation, then such death is called the culpable homicide. whether it is murder or culpable homicide is question of fact depends upon the degree of intention, what kind of weapons are used and where the injures are struck.

Exception 1-5 to 300 section says killing of human being is considered as culpable homicide does not amounts murder. There are three three headings which deals with death of human being.

1. Culpable Homicide. section-299.
2. Murder-Section 300.
3. Culpable Homicide does not amount murder-Exceptions 1-5 to 300.

The drafter of IPC have created the confusion by defining culpable homicide under 299 and creating  five exceptions to murder and calling it as culpable homicide does not amounts murder. Both deals with the same matter, it would have been better if section 299 is omitted.   

Man fights dead son.s divorce case. reported in indiatimes.com.

80 years old father authorised by the Bomabay High Court to pursue the divorce procedings intiatied by the son after his death is important development in the law.

Right to seek either criminal or civil justice is important right of every human being. Rights are enjoyed  by the person after his berth and before the death. It means rights cannot be enforced against or in-favor of dead man.

Criminal justice is based on the principle of "Actio personalis moritur cum persona." means man can not punished in his graveyard. The object of Criminal justice is to punish the wrong doer, so his death terminates the proceedings of criminal trial because dead man can not imprisoned or punished. Now days punishments may in the form of fine also. In such case the trial may be continued because the fine would be recoverable  from his estate. This is okay when the trial is over, fine has been imposed thereafter the criminal is dead. supposes the criminal dies during the trial the question would it be continued even it is punishable by fine.Another principle of criminal proceeding is that trial should be held in the presence accused and he should be given chance defend himself. on this logic the criminal trial would not be continued after death of the under-trial.

The matter is different in case of the civil proceedings. Object of civil justice is to claim the damages which can be achieved inspite of death of the party because the awarded damages would be recovered from the property of the dead man which is now in the hands of heirs. Civil suits may be related to property rights or personal rights.Death makes difference in case of civil suits related to personal rights. for example A has filled the suit for enforcement of conjugal rights against his wife, if wife dies during the  proceeding, then proceedings would  not be continued because the conjugal rights can not be enforced agains the dead wife.

In this reported  case also son has filled the divorce procedings against his wife during his life time. Now the death of the son naturally the terminates the proceedings of the divorce because it is based on the personal rights of the parties.when the person who wanted to seek the divorce from the wife is no more alive then no one else can claim it on his behalf because it his personal right.Nevertheless is this theory or principle is fair or unfair.when the man has filled divorce petition against his wife then he has made his intention clear that woman should be continued as his wife. during the suit proceedings if the petitioner dies, why the proceedings would not be continued. what is harm in contuning the case. The man who wanted to get rid of from his wife would be continued as legal wife for ever. Moreover she would inherit his property as class one heir excluding others, against whom he fought for entire life and spend all his resources for that legal battle. Mere death frustrate all these things and his foe becomes most preferred legal heir, What humiliation or insult to that dead man? Don't u think the proceedings of that man should be continued by the legal heirs? Bombay High Court has done right thing by allowing his father to continue the divorce proceeding insituted by the deceased son. I think judgment is highly appreciable.

Natural law.

1. natural law lies in ethics, religious, supernatural.
2. Moral justification for existing social and legal system.
3. Different concept, Doctrine and meaning at different time.
4. Universal, eternal law, unwritten law.
5. principles of morality and justice.