Listen to this article:

We live in a country where rape conviction rates remain stubbornly low. In 2023, the conviction rate for rapes was recorded at about 22% – one of the lowest amongst all violent crimes in India. And that statistic tells only half the story. Many cases never reach a courtroom. Many never even become FIRs. Many are withdrawn under pressure, buried under stigma, or abandoned under the sheer weight of the process. Yet every time a rape conviction does emerge from this maze, our first instinct often seems to be to doubt it.

The criticism surrounding the recent Tarun Tejpal judgment got me thinking. Not about the idea of the “perfect rape victim” which feminist scholars have critiqued for decades, but about something else entirely: What is a perfect rape conviction? Because if public reactions are anything to go by, a perfect rape conviction appears to require an impossible level of proof. The victim must have reported immediately. Her memory must be flawless. Her conduct before and after the assault must be textbook. There must be witnesses. CCTV footage. Medical evidence. Digital trails. Corroboration from every conceivable source. We look for evidence that even the law of evidence does not demand in such cases. In short, the conviction should be so airtight that one starts wondering: if there were this many witnesses, cameras and records, how did the assault happen in the first place?

Take the Tejpal case. For some critics, perhaps the conviction would have been........

© The Wire