The Chhattisgarh High Court has described necrophilia, or sexual intercourse with a dead body, as one of the "most horrendous crimes" that can be imagined. But the court noted that Indian laws at present do not treat these acts as 'rape' under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) or under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

Why sexual intercourse with dead body not considered rape

The bench consisting of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru noted that in order for the act to be considered under the head of rape by the law, the victim has to be alive. In reference to Karnataka High Court judgment in the case of Rangaraju vs. State of Karnataka 2023 it clarified that Indian laws do not have sexual intercourse with a dead body under Section 376 of IPC as an offense.

The observation was made while pronouncing judgment on a case relating to the ghastly kidnapping, rape, and murder of a nine-year-old girl. Nitin Yadav, who had been accused of murdering the girl, was convicted of the crime, following which her body was taken to a hill and buried. Before the burial, co-accused Neelkanth alias Neelu Nagesh sexually assaulted the deceased's body.

Background of the case

The court held that Yadav strangled the victim to death took her body to his house and kept it there, hidden. He further communicated to Neelkanth and begged him to dispose of the body. They then took the body to a hillside, where Neelkanth engaged sexually with the body before burying it.

While Yadav was convicted under Sections 363, 376(3), 302, 201 IPC, and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Neelkanth was acquitted of rape charges but convicted under Section 201 IPC for concealing evidence.

Human rights of the deceased

The court drew attention to Article 21 of the Constitution, which ensures not only the right to live with dignity but also the right to a dignified death. Citing the Nithari Killing Case, the bench emphasized that acts like necrophilia violate principles of bodily integrity, consent, and dignity, even though current laws do not explicitly criminalize such offenses.

"The depredations committed by the accused upon dead bodies of his victims cannot be turned a blind eye," the court stated while acknowledging the legal gap in addressing crimes involving necrophilia.

Court's decision and directions

Dismissing the appeal filed by the mother of the victim for the conviction of Neelkanth under rape charges, the court upheld his conviction under Section 201 IPC for destroying evidence. Neelkanth, who was earlier granted bail this year, was asked to surrender and serve the remaining sentence for this crime.

Meanwhile, Nitin Yadav’s conviction for murder, rape, and other charges was upheld by the court.