Bengaluru: The remarks made by a Karnataka High Court judge during the hearing of a rape accused’s bail plea have triggered discussion in legal circles as well as among the public, bringing back questions about crimes against women, deterrence, and whether the present justice system is able to create enough fear among offenders.
The case relates to Gopi Reddy Karthik Reddy, a 23-year-old engineering student accused of raping his classmate. The matter came up before Justice R. Nataraj of the Karnataka High Court, who, during the hearing, made a series of strong observations on rising violent crimes and what he described as the weakening fear of law.
Justice Nataraj remarked that “the law has lost its teeth because we don’t deal with offenders firmly,” expressing concern that despite strict legal provisions, crimes against women continue to occur repeatedly. The judge observed that unless there is a stronger sense of consequences, people may not fear violating the law.
The remarks gained wider attention when Justice Nataraj referred to severe punishments followed in some countries while discussing deterrence. In comments that later became widely discussed, he reportedly observed that people may follow the law if punishments are stricter, saying “if you chop a leg or hand, perhaps only then people will realise how to comply with law.” The observation was made during a broader discussion on whether existing punishments are acting as enough deterrent against serious crimes.
The matter was not finally decided during the hearing, and the court posted it for further proceedings.
The judge’s comments have drawn mixed reactions. Some people see the remarks as reflecting growing frustration over repeated incidents of sexual violence and the feeling that despite legal reforms, brutal crimes continue to occur. Incidents such as the 2012 Nirbhaya gang rape in Delhi and the 2019 Hyderabad rape and murder case had earlier triggered nationwide anger and demands for stricter punishment.
At the same time, some legal experts have expressed concern over the language used in court, arguing that while concern over heinous crimes is understandable, judicial observations should remain within constitutional principles and due process.
The remarks have once again opened up a larger discussion: with crimes against women continuing to shock the country, has the fear of law weakened, and is the present system doing enough to deter such offences?
