Intercourse by any member of the management or staff of a hospital with any woman in that hospital
Section 376D of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with intercourse by any member of the management or staff of a hospital with any woman in that hospital. Whoever, being on the management of a hospital or being on the staff of a hospital takes advantage of his position and has sexual intercourse with any woman in that hospital, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a 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 Repealed by section 358 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (45 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and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.
Whoever, being on the management of a hospital or being on the staff of a hospital takes advantage of his position and has sexual intercourse with any woman in that hospital, such sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation.-The expression "hospital" shall have the same meaning as in Explanation 3 to sub-section (2) of section 376.]
Of unnatural offences
Section 376D, The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act 45 of 1860).
Now in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
BNS 68 Sexual intercourse by a person in authority Distant match 57%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
This section refers to
Referred to by 17
- Code of Criminal Procedure s. 27 Jurisdiction in the case of juveniles
- Code of Criminal Procedure s. 173 Report of police officer on completion of investigation
- Code of Criminal Procedure s. 311 Power to summon material witness, or examine person present
- Code of Criminal Procedure s. 328 Procedure in case of accused being lunatic
- Code of Criminal Procedure s. 357 Order to pay compensation
- Code of Criminal Procedure s. 359 Order to pay costs in non-cognizable cases
- Code of Criminal Procedure Act s. 28 Sentences which High Courts and Sessions Judges may pass
- Code of Criminal Procedure Act s. 357 Order to pay compensation
- Code of Criminal Procedure Act s. 360 Order to release on probation of good conduct or after admonition
- Criminal Law (Aunachal Pradesh Amendment) Act 2018 s. 16
- Criminal Law (Aunachal Pradesh Amendment) Act 2018 s. 18
- Code of Criminal Procedure s. 327 Court to be open
and 5 more
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.
-
Shrawan Kashinath Lilake vs The State of Maharashtra
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When the material on record prima facie does not establish that an accused was a member of a group acting with common intention to commit gang rape, and the evidence suggests the accused arrived at the crime scene after the initial assault, the conviction under Section 376D IPC is questionable. In such circumstances, where the accused has already undergone prolonged incarceration, suspension of sentence pending appeal is justified under Section 389 CrPC, subject to stringent bail conditions to protect the victim and ensure the accused's appearance.
On this section: Gang rape provision - requires proof that the accused was part of a group of persons acting with common intention to commit rape. The court examined whether the applicant's conduct satisfied this requirement.
-
Ritu Chugh vs The State (nct Delhi)
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When allegations of facilitating rape under Section 376D IPC and human trafficking under Section 370 IPC are disclosed in the FIR, and the accused's conduct appears to have facilitated such grave offences, pre-arrest bail should be denied, as the gravity of the offences and the statutory punishment framework (minimum 20 years for rape facilitation, minimum 7 years for trafficking) disentitle the accused to such relief.
On this section: Gang rape - defined as rape committed by a group of persons acting together. The court applied this section to the petitioner's alleged facilitation of rape, noting it is punishable with rigorous imprisonment for not less than twenty years, which may extend to life imprisonment.
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.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J. These Criminal Appeals are filed against the judgment of the Court of the Sessions Judge, Ernakulam in S.C.No.439 of 2015 arising out of Crime No.234/2015 of Kalamassery Police Station. The appeals are preferred by A1 to A4 against their conviction and sentence under Sections 120B(1), 366, 376D, 394, 323 and 342 of the Indian Penal Code [hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC']; and by A5 and A6 against their conviction and sentence under Section 212 read with Sections 34, 411 and 414 of IPC. 2. The prosecution case is that A1 to A4 hatched a criminal conspiracy to commit abduction, rape and robbery. …
-
… A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J. These Criminal Appeals are filed against the judgment of the Court of the Sessions Judge, Ernakulam in S.C.No.439 of 2015 arising out of Crime No.234/2015 of Kalamassery Police Station. The appeals are preferred by A1 to A4 against their conviction and sentence under Sections 120B(1), 366, 376D, 394, 323 and 342 of the Indian Penal Code [hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC']; and by A5 and A6 against their conviction and sentence under Section 212 read with Sections 34, 411 and 414 of IPC. 2. The prosecution case is that A1 to A4 hatched a criminal conspiracy to commit abduction, rape and robbery. …
-
… The defence version on the other hand is not worth placing reliance. The trial court, therefore, rightly convicted the three (03) accused appellants namely Dhari Kumar Jamatia, Kumar Jamatia and Khuphula Jamatia for offence punishable under Section 376D of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to RI for 20(twenty) years with fine payable to the victim which is the minimum sentence provided under Section 376D, IPC. The offence punishable under Section 323 IPC for voluntarily causing hurt to Pushpa Sadhan Jamatia also having been proved against accused appellants …
Questions about Section 376D
What have the courts held on Section 376D of the Indian Penal Code?
Shrawan Kashinath Lilake vs The State of Maharashtra (25 Oct 2021) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Gang rape provision - requires proof that the accused was part of a group of persons acting with common intention to commit rape. The court examined whether the applicant's conduct satisfied this requirement. Another 1 judgment on this section is set out below. They run from 2019 to 2021.
How do I find court cases under Section 376D 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 376D, section 376D IPC, section 376D of the Indian Penal Code. People searching for it also type ipc 376da in hindi and ipc 376d in bns. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 2 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Shrawan Kashinath Lilake vs The State of Maharashtra (25 Oct 2021).
What should I read with Section 376D of the Indian Penal Code, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 376 (Punishment for rape), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 17 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNS 68 (Sexual intercourse by a person in authority), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 376D of the Indian Penal Code come into force?
Section 376D of the Indian Penal Code, commonly called gang rape, and cited as IPC 376D, 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.