Karnataka HC Urges Centre to Enact Laws For Punishing Desecration of Deceased

The High Court of Karnataka has recently urged the Centre to amend relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) or introduce new ones to criminalize and establish penalties for engaging in ‘carnal intercourse’ with corpses.

The Court made the recommendation following the acquittal of an individual under Section 376 of the IPC. The court emphasized the need to amend the existing ‘rape’ provision to encompass convictions for engaging in intercourse with a deceased body.

In a grievous incident, the accused committed the abominable crime of murdering a woman and engaging in sexual intercourse with her deceased body. Nevertheless, the court upheld the sentence of rigorous life imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 on the accused under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

After careful examination of the provisions outlined in Section 375 and Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), it becomes evident that engaging in sexual intercourse with a deceased body does not fall within the scope of these sections. The legal interpretation of these provisions indicates that a dead body cannot be classified as a human or person. Therefore, the aforementioned sections, namely 375 and 377 of the IPC, would not be applicable in this particular case.

In its judgment on May 30, the Division Bench of Justices B Veerappa and Venkatesh Naik T expressed, “It is evident that the accused engaged in sexual intercourse with the dead body. Whether this constitutes an offense under Section 375 or Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code? A careful examination of the provisions of Section 375 and 377 of the Indian Penal Code clarifies that a dead body cannot be classified as a human or a person. Consequently, the provisions of Sections 375 or 377 of the Indian Penal Code would not be applicable. Therefore, no offense punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code has been committed.”

Several countries, including the UK and Canada, where crimes against dead bodies are criminal offenses punishable by law, the High Court recommended the introduction of such provisions in India.

It suggested that, “The central government shall amend the new provision in the IPC with regard to sadism or necrophilia against the person whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the natural including the dead body of the woman, punishable with imprisonment of life or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 years and also shall be liable for fine.”

Additionally, the High Court also issued a directive to the state government, mandating the installation of CCTV cameras in mortuaries across all government & private hospitals within a span of six months. This measure aims to prevent offenses against deceased bodies. Furthermore, the court recommended the proper maintenance of mortuary services and the sensitization of staff members to ensure appropriate handling and respect for the deceased.

On June 25, 2015, a murder and rape incident occurred, involving individuals from a village in the Tumakuru district. The victim, a 21-year-old woman, was found murdered with her throat slit on her way home from a computer class. The accused, a 22-year-old, was arrested a week later.

Following the trial, the Session Court rendered a conviction against the accused under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced him to rigorous life imprisonment. Furthermore, the accused was found guilty of rape under Section 376, resulting in a 10-year imprisonment sentence on August 14, 2017.

Subsequently, the accused appealed the verdict in the High Court, which was heard by a division bench. The defense contended that the accused’s actions amounted to ‘necrophilia,’ and there was no specific provision in the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to convict him for such an act.

After the examination, the High Court pronounced the accused guilty of murder but acquitted him of the rape charges. The court based its decision on the presented evidence, which indicated that the rape occurred subsequent to the victim’s murder.