Indian Penal Code, 1860 · Chapter XVI: Of Offences Affecting the Human Body · Sexual offences
Section 376: Punishment for rape
The Indian Penal Code, 1860 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to offences and proceedings from before that date.
(1) Whoever, except in the cases provided for in sub-section (2), commits rape, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment of either description for a term which [shall not be less than ten years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine].
(2) Whoever,—
(a) being a police officer, commits rape—
(i) within the limits of the police station to which such police officer is appointed; or
(ii) in the premises of any station house; or
(iii) on a woman in such police officer's custody or in the custody of a police officer subordinate to such police officer; or
(b) being a public servant, commits rape on a woman in such public servant's custody or in the custody of a public servant subordinate to such public servant; or
(c) being a member of the armed forces deployed in an area by the Central or a State Government commits rape in such area; or
(d) being on the management or on the staff of a jail, remand home or other place of custody established by or under any law for the time being in force or of a women's or children's institution, commits rape on any inmate of such jail, remand home, place or institution; or
(e) being on the management or on the staff of a hospital, commits rape on a woman in that hospital; or
(f) being a relative, guardian or teacher of, or a person in a position of trust or authority towards the woman, commits rape on such woman; or
(g) commits rape during communal or sectarian violence; or
(h) commits rape on a woman knowing her to be pregnant; or * * * * *
(j) commits rape, on a woman incapable of giving consent; or
(k) being in a position of control or dominance over a woman, commits rape on such woman; or
(l) commits rape on a woman suffering from mental or physical disability; or
(m) while committing rape causes grievous bodily harm or maims or disfigures or endangers the life of a woman; or
(n) commits rape repeatedly on the same woman, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person's natural life, and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation.—For the purposes of this sub-section,—
(a) “armed forces” means the naval, military and air forces and includes any member of the Armed Forces constituted under any law for the time being in force, including the paramilitary forces and any auxiliary forces that are under the control of the Central Government or the State Government;
(b) “hospital” means the precincts of the hospital and includes the precincts of any institution for the reception and treatment of persons during convalescence or of persons requiring medical attention or rehabilitation;
(c) “police officer” shall have the same meaning as assigned to the expression “police” under the Police Act, 1861 (5 of 1861);
(d) “women's or children's institution” means an institution, whether called an orphanage or a home for neglected women or children or a widow's home or an institution called by any other name, which is established and maintained for the reception and care of women or children. [(3) Whoever, commits rape on a woman under sixteen years of age shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than twenty years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person's natural life, and shall also be liable to fine:
Provided that such fine shall be just and reasonable to meet the medical expenses and rehabilitation of the victim:
Provided further that any fine imposed under this sub-section shall be paid to the victim.]
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 376
-
The State of Jharkhand v. The Indian Builders Jamshedpur
Bharat Drilling & Foundation Treatment Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Jharkhand and Ors. (2009) 16 SCC 705, if requires to be referred to a larger bench for reconsideration and authoritative decision in order to obviate…
-
Sushil Kumar Tiwari v. Hare Ram Sah & Ors.
Allegation against the respondent nos.1 and 2 that they raped a minor girl. It is admitted that they never committed the acts together and always acted separately. In light of the controversy involved in the instant…
-
Putai v. State of Uttar Pradesh
The accused-appellants were convicted for the offences punishable u/ss.376(2)(g), 201 and 302 of Penal Code, 1860. The High Court dismissed the appeals against conviction preferred by the accused-appellants.
-
Vasanta Sampat Dupare v. Union of India & Ors.
Writ petition filed u/Art.32 challenging the continuing validity of the sentence of death against the petitioner, having been affirmed on appeal, declined in review, and followed by the rejection of mercy petitions and…
-
Jamnalal v. State of Rajasthan and Another
In the instant appeal, the father of the prosecutrix challenges the order of the High Court. By the said order, the sentence imposed on respondent no.2 herein was suspended till the final disposal of the appeal. Whether…
-
Kallu Nat Alias Mayank Kumar Nagar v. State of U.P. and Anr.
Whether the Court of Session, without itself recording evidence, can summon a person to stand trial in exercise of its powers u/s.193, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as an accused (along with others committed to it by…
-
Deepak Kumar Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh
The appellant came to be convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable u/ss.450 and 376(2) of the IPC and s.4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 [POCSO Act]. Whether the High Court was…
-
Victim ‘X’ v. State of Bihar and Anr.
Allegations of torture and sexual exploitation against the respondent no.2-accused. She was granted bail by the High Court. Whether the grant of bail to the respondent no.2-accused has resulted into travesty of justice.
-
Jai Prakash v. State of Uttarakhand
Allegation against the appellant herein that he committed a forceful rape and strangulated a 10 year old girl child. The punishment handed down to the appellant by the Courts below was of death penalty. Whether the…
-
Kattavellai @ Devakar v. State of Tamilnadu
Issue arose as to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court upholding the order of the conviction and death sentence of the appellant for offence punishable u/ss.302, 376 and 397 IPC.
-
Madhukar & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the High Court erred in dismissing the petitions filed by the appellants u/s.482, CrPC seeking quashing of criminal proceedings initiated against them, and holding…
-
Central Bureau of Investigation v. Sekh Jamir Hossain and Ors.
The respondents herein were granted bail by the High Court for the offences punishable u/ss.143, 144, 147, 148, 149, 427, 326, 376 r/w ss.511 and 34 of IPC, 1860.
-
Batlanki Keshav (Kesava) Kumar Anurag v. State of Telangana & Anr.
Issue arose as to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court whereby the petition filed by the appellant seeking quashing of the FIR for the offences punishable u/s.376(2)(n) IPC and s.3(2)(v) of the…
-
Amol Bhagwan Nehul v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Issue arose as regards the correctness of order passed by the High Court dismissing the petition whereby the appellant sought quashing of criminal case against him that the appellant forcibly had sexual intercourse with…
-
IN RE: RIGHT TO PRIVACY OF ADOLESCENTS versus
Issue arose as regards sentencing the accused; about the rehabilitation of the victim and her child; and about adopting measures for adolescent well being and child protection.
-
Waris v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Whether Trial Court ought to have given proper time and opportunity to the legal aid defence counsel to prepare the matter and should have deferred the cross-examination of PW-1 by a reasonable time so as to ensure…
-
Ramkirat Munilal Goud v. State of Maharashtra Etc.
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court upholding the conviction and death sentence of the appellant for causing rape and murder of a child aged 3 years and 9 months.
-
Raju @ Umakant v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Sections 366, 376(2)(g) and 342, Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(2)(v), Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is justified.
-
Ravish Singh Rana v. State of Uttarakhand & Anr.
Whether the High Court erred in dismissing the petition filed by the appellant for quashing of FIR and the consequential proceedings.
-
S.C. Narang v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
Issue arose whether the Chairman of Managing Committee which runs the school can be punished for offence of cruelty to the child u/s.75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act.
-
Sachin v. State of Maharashtra
Issue arose whether, the High Court could enhance the sentence under its revisional powers in a convict’s appeal against conviction.
-
Biswajyoti Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal & Anr.
Whether the allegations against the appellant, as they stand, constitute an offence, u/ss.376(2)(f), 417 and 506 IPC; and whether the case of the appellant is fit for discharge u/s.227 CrPC, 1973.
-
Jaspal Singh Kaural v. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.
Appellant established physical relationship with the complainant on promise of marriage. Complainant obtained divorce from her husband on the assurance of the appellant that he will marry her. Later, on refusal of the…
-
Jothiragawan v. State Rep. By The Inspector of Police & Anr.
Whether the criminal proceedings against the appellant-accused ought to be quashed.
-
State of Rajasthan v. Chatra
Whether the High Court erred in reversing the conviction of the respondent-accused under Section 376, Penal Code, 1860 for the rape of a minor girl and acquitting him.
-
Gyanendra Singh @ Raja Singh v. State of U.P.
Whether the conviction of the appellant ought to have been recorded under the IPC or whether the provisions of the Special law, i.e., Section 42A of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, would prevail…
-
Rajnish Singh @ Soni v. State of U.P. and Another
Matter pertains to the liability of the appellant to be prosecuted for committing rape upon the complainant by giving her a false promise of marriage; and the correctness of the order passed by the High Court dismissing…
-
Raju @ Nirpendra Singh v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Prosecutrix, a minor village girl, was allegedly kidnapped on the pretext of securing her a job, and then gang raped by accused-appellants over a period of two months by holding her captive by threatening her life.…
-
The State of Himachal Pradesh v. Rajesh Kumar @ Munnu
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court acquitting the accused u/ss.376 and 452 IPC.
-
Suman Mishra & Ors. v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Whether the High Court erred in finding that there were specific allegations in the FIR and Chargesheet even after dropping the charge of Section 376, IPC in order to maintain the criminal proceedings against the…
-
Sanjay v. State of Uttar Pradesh
The Appellant/accused was convicted under Section 302 IPC and 376(2)(G) IPC for alleged murder of a four-year-old girl. The Trial Court convicted the Appellant and sentenced him to death, which was later confirmed by…
-
Kuldeep Singh v. The State of Punjab & Ors.
The accused-appellant’s petition u/s.482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 seeking quashing of the FIR u/ss.366, 376 and 506 of Penal Code, 1860 was dismissed by the High Court.
-
Ajay Malik v. State of Uttarakhand & Anr.
(1) Whether the High Court acted well within the contours of its powers under Section 482 of the CrPC in rejecting Ajay Malik’s quashing petition; (2) Whether the High Court fell in error in rejecting the Compounding…
-
Chandrabhan Sudam Sanap v. The State of Maharashtra
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court upholding the conviction of the appellant for rape and murder of the deceased and imposition of death sentence.
-
Manish Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
The appellant herein has sought to quash proceedings for the offences punishable under Sections 376, 323, 504 and 506, Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3(1)(r),3(1)(s), 3(2)(5a) and 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the…
-
Irfan Alias Bhayu Mevati v. State of Madhya Pradesh
In a case where the trial court relied upon the DNA report, whether the non-examination of the scientific experts involved in the process of conducting DNA profiling examination and issuing the report, led to the…
-
Abdul Nassar v. State of Kerala & Anr.
Whether the prosecution has proved by leading clinching and convincing circumstantial evidence that the accused had committed forcible and violent sexual assault on the child victim and, thereafter, strangled and killed…
-
Rinku Baheti v. Sandesh Sharda
Issue arose whether the petitioner-wife is entitled to the transfer of the divorce petition; and whether this Court, upon the application filed by the respondent-husband, can exercise its powers u/Art. 142(1) of the…
-
Amar Sardar v. The State of West Bengal
Whether the High Court was justified in affirming the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Fast Track Court.
-
Ashok v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order of conviction and sentence against the appellant, for the offences punishable u/ss.376, 302, 201 IPC as also SC and ST Act 1989; and as regards the role of the Public…
-
Kamaruddin Dastagir Sanadi v. State of Karnataka Through Sho Kakati Police
Whether the High Court was justified in reversing the acquittal of the appellant-accused and convicting him under Sections 417, 306 IPC.
-
Mahesh Damu Khare v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
The High Court dismissed the petition filed u/s.482 of CrPC for quashing FIR registered u/ss.376, 420, 504 and 506 IPC holding, inter alia, that the offence under Section 376 of IPC is an offence against the society…
-
Prashant v. State of NCT of Delhi
Whether FIR u/ss.376(2)(n) and s.506 IPC lodged against the appellant should be quashed; whether allegations in the FIR are correct; whether relationship between the parties was consensual in nature.
-
Siddique v. State of Kerala & Anr.
Whether the appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail.
-
XYZ v. The State of Gujarat & Anr.
Whether criminal proceedings for non-compoundable offences can be quashed on the ground of settlement.
-
Lalu Yadav v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
Whether the High Court ought to have exercised its inherent power under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing the FIR against the appellant under Section 376, Penal Code, 1860.
-
Harshad Gupta v. The State of Chhattisgarh
The Judge who had convicted the appellant was transferred post conviction, before the appellant could be heard on the quantum of sentence and a new Judge was posted in his place. Appellant relying on Sections 353 and…
-
Bhagwan Singh v. State of U.P. & Ors.
Respondent Nos.3 and 4, son-in-law and daughter of the petitioner respectively, made attempts to falsely implicate the Respondent No.2-a star witness in the Nitish Katara case on whose evidence the accused son and…
-
Rabbu @ Sarvesh v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
The appellant was convicted for offences punishable u/ss. 450, 376(2)(i), 376D, 376A and 302 r/w. s.34 of IPC and s.5(g)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) awarding death penalty…
-
Dhanraj Aswani v. Amar S. Mulchandani & Anr.
Whether an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is maintainable at the instance of an accused while he is already in judicial custody in connection with his…
-
IN RE: RIGHT TO PRIVACY OF ADOLESCENTS versus
(i) When a Court deals with an appeal against an order of conviction, what are the essentials, which a judgment must contain; (ii) What was the duty of the High Court while ascertaining the offences u/s.6 of the…
-
James Kunjwal v. State of Uttarakhand & Anr.
The Single Judge of the High Court observed that the appellant had intentionally filed a false affidavit and therefore a direction was issued to the Registrar (Judicial) of the High Court to file a complaint against…
-
Shiv Pratap Singh Rana v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr.
The prosecutrix had lodged an FIR u/s. 376(2)(n) and s.506 of IPC on 06.09.2018 against the appellant. The charges u/s. 376(2) (n) and s.506 of IPC were framed against the appellant and the application for discharge…
-
Selvamani v. The State Rep. By The Inspector of Police
Appellant was one of the five accused persons who were found guilty of committing the offence of gang rape and was convicted under Section 376(g) and 506(1) of Penal Code, 1860 and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of…
-
Child in Conflict With Law Through His Mother v. The State of Karnataka and Another
(i) Whether the period provided for completion of preliminary assessment u/s. 14(3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is mandatory or directory; (ii) Whether the words ‘Children’s…
-
Sharif Ahmed and Another v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another
Nature of chargesheets filed in some jurisdictions by the State/ Police, without stating sufficient details of the facts constituting the offense or putting the relevant evidence on record; significance of chargesheets…
-
A (Mother of X) v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.
Matter pertains to the opinion of the medical board constituted under the MTP Act to reflect the effect of the pregnancy on the pregnant person’s physical and mental health; that the MTP Act and the reproductive right…
-
Ms. X v. Mr. A and Others
Whether the High Court erred in quashing the criminal proceedings by exercising the powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C in a complaint alleging offences under Sections 354D, 376(2)(n), 504 and 506 read with 34 of the…
-
Navas @ Mulanavas v. State of Kerala
Appellant-accused was held guilty for the offences punishable u/ ss.302, 449, 309, IPC and sentenced accordingly. For the offence punishable u/s.302, IPC, he was sentenced to death. High Court confirmed the conviction,…
-
XXXX v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Another
High Court, if justified in dismissing the petition filed by the appellant u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR registered against him u/ss. 376 (2)(n) and 506 IPC.
-
Bilkis Yakub Rasool v. Union of India & Others
Writ petition filed u/Art. 32 by one of the victims challenging the order of State of Gujarat granting remission and early release of 11 convicts held guilty in Bilkis Bano matter, if maintainable; writ petitions filed…
-
Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka and Ors.
Whether the power of the High Court or the Court of Session to grant anticipatory bail u/s 438 CrPC could be exercised with respect to an FIR registered outside the territorial jurisdict ion of the said Court; and…
-
Manak Chand @ Mani v. The State of Haryana
Whether the courts below were justified in convicting and sentencing the appellant for offence of rape u/s. 376 IPC.
-
Naveen @ Ajay v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Whether appellant was afforded a fair trial; whether he was deprived of his valuable legal rights.
-
Sanjit Saha & Anr. v. The State of West Bengal
Matter pertains to the steps/guidelines to be taken in cases where despite the convicts surrendering within the time granted by the Supreme Court but no communication forthcomin g on or before the matter was listed in…
-
Joseph v. The State of Kerala
Whether the writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking appropriate direction to the Sta te Government, to prematurely release him, having been in custody-actual imprisonment for over 26 years, and served a sentence…
-
Munna Pandey v. State of Bihar
Whether the High Court erred in confirming the conviction and death sentence passed by trial court against appellant-accused for offences punishable u/ss.302, 376, IPC and s.4, POCSO Act, 2012, despite serious lapses in…
-
Central Bureau of Investigation v. Narottam
In cases relating to offences arising out of the Vyapam Scam, respondents-accused filed applications seeking direction to supply a Hindi translation of the charge sheet filed by the appel lant in English language.…
-
Bhagw An Singh v. Dilip Kumar @ Deepu @ Depak
Whether the Single Judge of the High Court was justified in granting bail to the respondent-accused in connection with the FIR registered against them by the appellant-uncle of the minor girl alleging gang rape, threat…
-
Mohammad Wajid and Anr. v. State of U.P.
In the instant case wherein FIR was registered u/ss. 395, 504, 506 and 323 IPC against the appellants, the questions which arose for consideration are whether the said case falls within the parameters laid down for…
- Dinganglung Gangmei v. Mutum Churamani Meetei
- Rohit Bishnoi v. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.
- Davinder Singh v. State of Punjab
- Prakash Nishad @ Kewat Zinak Nishad v. State of
- Kailash Vijayvargiya v. Rajlakshmi Chaudhuri
- Ravinder Singh v. The State Govt. of NCT of Delhi
- State of Rajasthan v. Asharam @ Ashumal
- Balu Sudam Khalde & Anr. v. The State of
- Shiva Kumar @ Shiva @ Shivamurthy v. State of
- Ms. X v. The State of Maharashtra and Another
- Karan @ Fatiya v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
- Naim Ahamed v. State (Nct of Delhi)
- Rahul v. State of Delhi Ministry of Home Affairs & Anr.
- B. A. Umesh v. Union of India & Ors.
- Mohd. Arif @ Ashfaq v. State (Nct of Delhi)
- The State of Jharkhand v. Shailendra Kumar Rai @ Pandav Rai
- Mohd. Firoz v. State of Madhya Pradesh
- Ramanand @ Nandlal Bharti v. State of Uttar Pradesh
- Chotkau v. State of Uttar Pradesh
- Xyz v. Abhisheik & Anr
- Manendra Prasad Tiwari v. Amit Kumar Tiwari & Anr.
- Shambhu Kharwar v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
- Xyz v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors
- Sadhna Chaudhary v. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.
- Manoj Pratap Singh v. The State of Rajasthan
- Ms. P Xxx v. State of Uttarakhand & Anr
- Veerendra v. State of Madhya Pradesh
- Bhola Kumhar v. State of Chhattisgarh
- Ms. P v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Another
- Mohd. Firoz v. State of Madhya Pradesh