Discretion, Discrimination and the Rule of LawSentencing: The new site of stereotyping -- The 'Two Finger' test -- Marital status of the victim -- Perpetuation of rape myths in sentencing -- Presence/absence of injuries -- The shadow of relationship on sentencing -- (a) Of 'Reciprocal passion' and 'Youthful exuberance': The case of elopement -- (b) Cases of statutory rape not involving elopement -- The (Dis)use of theories of punishment -- Deterrence -- Proportionality -- 'Ends of justice' -- Arbitrariness in sentencing: Irrelevance and inconsistency -- Using evidentiary factors in sentencing -- Mitigating factors -- 'Adequate and special reasons' -- (a) Mitigating factors cited by the Supreme Court -- (b) Mitigating factors cited by High Courts -- (i) Age as mitigating factor -- (ii) Delay in the judicial process -- (iii) Other mitigating circumstances -- Location of the crime -- Victim's age -- Aggravating factors -- Sentencing in aggravated rape -- Rape and murder -- Conclusion -- Endnotes -- 5 Myths and Stereotypes in Rape Prosecutions -- Introduction -- Rape Myths and Stereotypes: Laws and Impact on Rape Adjudication -- Identifying rape myths -- Impact of rape myths on adjudication -- Rape Law Reform -- United States -- United Kingdom -- The Impact of Rape Myths on Sentencing -- Conclusion -- Endnotes -- 6 Structuring Sentencing Discretion: Guideline Models and Approaches -- Introduction -- The History of Sentencing Discretion -- England -- United States -- The Rationale Behind Sentencing Guidelines -- Guideline Models -- Legislative regulation models -- Judicial models: Self-regulation by the judiciary -- Appellate review -- Guideline judgments -- The 'Instinctive synthesis' doctrine -- The sentencing commission model -- Numerical guidelines model -- (a) Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines -- (b) The Federal Sentencing Guidelines -- Specific guideline models: The case of Israel |
Contents
An Introduction to the Indian Criminal Justice System | 15 |
The Law and Practice of Rape Adjudication in India | 34 |
An Empirical Analysis | 61 |
Myths and Stereotypes in Rape Prosecutions | 106 |
The Need for Structuring | 161 |
Sentencing Guidelines for Rape | 187 |
List of Cases Studied for Empirical Analysis | 208 |
Templates of Format Used for Medical Examination | 234 |
Output of Regression Analysis | 258 |
Charts | 279 |
294 | |
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
aggravating and mitigating aggravating factor Andhra Pradesh appeal argues Ashworth Bihar Chhattisgarh cited consent considered aggravating considered mitigating Constitution of India Contd convicted Court Sentences Cr.P.C. Section crime death penalty decision defendant defendant’s deterrence discuss Ends of justice Federal Sentencing Guidelines finger test gang rape guideline judgments guideline models Gujarat Haryana High Court Himachal Pradesh hymen impact imprisonment independent variable Indian Penal Code instance intercourse Jhar Jharkhand judges judicial discretion Karnataka Kumar legislature Madhya Pradesh Maharashtra Medical Jurisprudence mitigating factor mitigating while sentencing offence Orissa person principle Punjab Rajasthan rape myths rape sentencing rape simpliciter rape victim reduced sentence relevant variables rules sentence imposed Sentencing Commission sentencing discretion sentencing in India Sentencing Reform Singh status stereotypes supra Chapter Supreme Court Suresh testimony theory of punishment trial court unwarranted disparity Uttar Pradesh variable and controlling Victim eloped Victim murdered Victim’s age West Bengal woman