Inconsistencies In Rape Sentencing In India Due To Prevalent Myths And Stereotypes
- IJLLR Journal
- 3 hours ago
- 1 min read
Kartikey Kumar, Campus Law Centre, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi
Ishani Kumar Singh, National Law Institute University, Bhopal
ABSTRACT
This paper examines inconsistencies in rape sentencing in India arising from entrenched myths and stereotypes. Using qualitative doctrinal analysis of ten Supreme Court judgments and key secondary literature, the study shows how judicial discretion, social bias, procedural practices, and institutional gaps contribute to disparate sentencing outcomes. The analysis reveals that while the Supreme Court has progressively issued directives against stereotype- based reasoning, a lack of binding guidelines allows these same myths to continue influencing disparate sentencing outcomes. It recommends structural reforms such as a statutory Sentencing Guidelines Authority, mandatory gender-sensitivity training for judges, clear reason-recording obligations, and a sentencing database—paired with procedural and educational measures to reduce bias.
