Rape
Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with rape. A man is said to commit "rape" who, except in the case hereinafter excepted, has sexual intercourse with a woman under circumstances falling under any of the six following descriptions:- First.-Against her will. The Act came into force on 01 Jan 1862. Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
A man is said to commit "rape" who, except in the case hereinafter excepted, has sexual intercourse with a woman under circumstances falling under any of the six following descriptions:-
First.-Against her will.
Secondly.-Without her consent.
Thirdly.-With her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting her or any person in whom she is interested in fear of death or of hurt.
Fourthly.-With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband, and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be lawfully married.
Fifthly.-With her consent, when, at the time of giving such consent, by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication or the administration by him personally or through another of any stupefying or unwholesome substance, she is unable to understand the nature and consequences of that to which she gives consent.
Sixthly.-With or without her consent, when she is under sixteen years of age.
Explanation.-Penetration is sufficient to constitute the sexual intercourse necessary to the offence of rape.
Exception.-Sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife, the wife not being under fifteen years of age, is not rape.
Section 375, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).
Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
BNS 63 Rape Close, with changes 76%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Independent Thought v. Union of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Exception 2 to section 375 IPC, which treated sexual intercourse by a husband with his wife aged 15-18 as not rape, is unconstitutional. Sexual intercourse with a girl below 18 is rape even if she is married.
On this section: Exception 2 to s.375 (sexual intercourse with wife aged 15-18 not rape) struck down.
-
Ganga Singh vs State of M. P
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The testimony of a rape victim (prosecutrix) is a competent and reliable form of evidence under Section 118 of the Indian Evidence Act requiring no mandatory corroboration in material particulars as the prosecutrix is a victim, not an accomplice. Her evidence carries the same evidentiary weight as that of an injured witness in cases of physical violence. When the prosecutrix provides a clear, categorical account of rape that is corroborated by evidence of prior consistent statements (under Section 157 IEA), forensic evidence confirming intercourse, and absence of motive for false implication, a conviction for rape under Section 376 IPC can be sustained beyond reasonable doubt notwithstanding absence of physical injuries or gaps in peripheral details not subject to cross-examination. The legal definition of 'consent' under Section 375 IPC requires voluntary participation involving full exercise of intelligence based on knowledge of the significance and moral quality of the act with complete freedom of choice between resistance and assent; inability to physically resist forced intercourse negates any claim of consent. Defects in police investigation do not warrant acquittal if the prosecution has established guilt through reliable evidence beyond reasonable doubt; defects only merit acquittal if they create reasonable doubt regarding the core charge.
On this section: Legal definition of rape requiring examination of what constitutes 'consent' - voluntary participation based on full knowledge and intelligence with freedom of choice between resistance and assent
-
State of H. P vs Prem Singh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cases of sexual assault, the delay in lodging an FIR cannot be treated as equivalent to delay in other categories of offences. Courts must recognize that tradition-bound societies, particularly in rural areas of India, have legitimate social, cultural, and psychological factors that may cause victims and their families to delay reporting sexual assault to police. To automatically or summarily reject a prosecution case solely on the ground of FIR delay would be improper and unsafe in such societal contexts. However, the basic ingredients of each offence, particularly the specific elements required for rape under Section 375 IPC, must still be independently and clearly proven by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt.
On this section: Defines rape and its basic ingredients; Court found that basic ingredients of rape were not established based on prosecutrix evidence
-
State of U. P vs Naushad
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Consent obtained by a man from a woman through a false promise of marriage, which he never intended to fulfill from the inception, constitutes rape under Section 375 IPC. Such consent is vitiated by misconception of fact under Section 90 IPC and is not voluntary consent in law. The absence of physical resistance by the victim does not negate rape when consent was fraudulently obtained through deception. A woman's body is not a plaything for a man to satisfy his lust by fooling her into consenting to sexual intercourse.
On this section: Definition of rape. The Court examined that rape includes sexual intercourse without consent, including where consent is obtained by fraud or misconception of fact. The Court applied this section to hold that consent obtained through false promise of marriage falls within the ambit of Section 375.
-
Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice Secretary
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, insofar as it criminalizes consensual sexual acts between adults of the same sex in private, violates Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(a), and 21 of the Constitution of India. Sexual orientation is an essential attribute of privacy and dignity, and the criminalization of consensual intimate acts between adults is manifestly arbitrary, discriminatory, and an unreasonable restriction on fundamental rights. The State has no legitimate interest in criminalizing such conduct, and constitutional morality, not social morality, must guide interpretation. Section 377 is read down to exclude consensual acts between adults in private while remaining applicable to non-consensual acts, acts involving minors, and bestiality.
On this section: Rape provision - compared with Section 377 to show that after 2013 amendment, consensual penetrative acts between heterosexual couples are not criminalized, creating anomaly with Section 377.
-
Deepak Gulati vs State of Haryana
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
For a conviction under Section 376 IPC based on false promise of marriage, the court must find clear and convincing evidence that the accused harboured mala fide intentions and made a false promise of marriage with the sole objective of seducing the victim into sexual acts from the very inception of the relationship. Mere breach of a promise to marry, or failure to fulfil a promise due to unforeseen circumstances or changed intentions during the course of the relationship, does not constitute rape unless the deception was deliberate and predatory from the beginning. The victim's age, maturity, voluntary participation, lack of resistance, and continued hope of marriage are relevant factors in determining whether consent was genuinely given or obtained through deception.
On this section: Definition of rape; examined in context of whether consent was obtained through fraud or misconception of fact
-
The State of Madhya Pradesh Home Department Station House Officer vs Mahendra @ Golu
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The rubbing of genitals on a victim's body with the clear intent to commit sexual intercourse, when the accused has taken deliberate overt steps to isolate the victim, undress both himself and the victim, and perform acts reasonably proximate to penetration, constitutes an 'attempt' to commit rape under Section 376(2)(f) read with Section 511 IPC, not mere 'preparation' or indecent assault under Section 354 IPC. The dividing line between preparation and attempt is determined by whether the accused has gone beyond the stage of preparation and commenced direct movement towards commission of the offence with the necessary intent, even if the attempt is interrupted before actual penetration.
On this section: Definition of rape as it stood before the 2013 Amendment. The court examined that rape includes sexual intercourse with a woman under 16 years of age with or without consent, and that penetration, however slight, is sufficient to constitute rape.
-
State of M. P vs Basodi
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In cases of rape or other serious offences against the dignity of women punishable under Section 376 IPC, courts cannot reduce sentences below the statutory minimum merely on the grounds of an offender's poverty, illiteracy, low occupational status, or membership in a socially disadvantaged category. The law requires that courts record 'adequate and special reasons' - both conditions being cumulative - to justify deviation from statutory minimum sentences. Such personal circumstances of the offender, standing alone, cannot constitute adequate and special reasons. Rather, the nature and gravity of the crime, the protection of society, the deterrence of criminals, the rights of victims, and the public abhorrence of the crime must be the paramount considerations in sentencing for rape and other serious offences affecting human dignity.
On this section: Definition of rape - the carnal knowledge of a woman by force and against her will, cited to establish the foundational definition and gravity of the offence
-
Kaini Rajan vs State of Kerala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In rape cases, while the testimony of the prosecutrix commands great respect and acceptability, if circumstances exist which cast doubt on the veracity of the victim's evidence, courts must be cautious. Rape convictions cannot be based solely on uncorroborated victim testimony when multiple circumstances (such as delay in FIR filing, prior acquaintance with accused, lack of resistance or witnesses at a public place and time, suspicious parental behavior, and subsequent consensual relations) collectively create reasonable doubt about whether the alleged act was truly non-consensual. The standard of proof requires not just reliance on victim's word but also absence of significant circumstances that undermine credibility.
On this section: Defines rape and its various clauses; Court examined meaning of 'without her consent' and 'against her will' and application to cases involving false promise of marriage
-
Hrishikesh Sahoo v. State of Karnataka
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Karnataka HC (Justice M. Nagaprasanna) refused to quash a husband's prosecution for sexual offences against his wife and held that Exception 2 to IPC 375 cannot be an absolute shield; a married woman is not denuded of bodily autonomy. WP 48367/2018 dismissed. Supreme Court later stayed the trial; constitutionality of the marital-rape exception remains pending (see also RIT Foundation DHC split).
On this section: Exception 2 is not an absolute bar; a husband's alleged sexual violence against his wife can go to trial. SC later stayed.
-
RIT Foundation v. Union of India
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Delhi HC DB split on Exception 2 to IPC 375 (marital-rape exception). Justice Rajiv Shakdher held the exception unconstitutional under Articles 14, 15 and 21; Justice C. Hari Shankar upheld it as a legislative classification. Certificate of appeal to the Supreme Court granted. No majority striking down the exception; matter pending in SC. BNS 63 carries a pari materia marital-rape exception.
On this section: Split on Exception 2 (sexual intercourse by a husband with his wife, not under 18, is not rape). No majority striking it down.
-
Hasibuddin Mondal ORS vs State of West Bengal
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Family members cannot be prosecuted for offences under Sections 493, 376, or 313 of the IPC when the alleged sexual acts and deception are attributed solely to the principal accused and the ingredients of such crimes do not apply to the relatives.
On this section: Defining rape and consent vitiated by misconception of fact.
-
Ajit Kumar vs State of U.p.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The High Court will not interfere with charge framing orders at the interlocutory stage of criminal proceedings. The proper remedy for an accused who disputes the charges framed by the trial court is to move an application before the trial court itself for alteration of charges under the Criminal Procedure Code, which can be done at any stage of the proceedings before judgment is pronounced. The High Court's inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC should not be exercised to examine the correctness of charges at this stage.
On this section: Definition of rape; applicant contended no offense made out under this section
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 375
What have the courts held on Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code?
Independent Thought v. Union of India (11 Oct 2017) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Exception 2 to s.375 (sexual intercourse with wife aged 15-18 not rape) struck down. Another 12 judgments on this section are set out below, 9 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2008 to 2023.
How do I find court cases under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: IPC 375, section 375 IPC, section 375 of the Indian Penal Code. People searching for it also type ipc 375 in bns and ipc 375 and 376. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 13 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Independent Thought v. Union of India (11 Oct 2017).
What should I read with Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?
2 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 63 (Rape), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code come into force?
Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, cited as IPC 375, came into force on 01 Jan 1862, having been enacted on 06 Oct 1860. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 499. Defamation1512 words
- 464. Making a false document1223 words
- 300. Murder1172 words
- 378. Theft980 words
- 108. Abettor745 words
- 403. Dishonest misappropriation of property727 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 7b7d4fe6-206b-4e33-81f1-b98b018acaf6). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.