No BNS sec for sexual offences on men, transgenders & animals

Indore: The newly introduced Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) seems to have left the police in a dilemma by excluding the provisions previously covered under IPC Section 377, which addressed sodomy and unnatural sex. The officials are not sure which sections of BNS to invoke in case of sexual misconduct against a man, transgender or an animal.
The BNS lacks specific provisions for non-consensual sexual offences against males, transgender individuals and non-human entities such as animals, experts said.
Even police officials are not very sure which sections to invoke if such cases approach them. “There are sections under which sexual offence against women and children can be registered but non-consensual unnatural sexual offences against men, transgenders and animals are not defined yet. We are still studying the BNS to find if it has been put up under any section making it gender neutral,” said Indore police commissioner Rakesh Gupta.
National Crimes Record Bureau (NCRB) of India recorded 826 cases under IPC 377 in 2020 and 955 cases in 2021. Despite these numbers, there is widespread acknowledgment that sexual crimes against men and transgender individuals are severely under-reported.
Senior police officials wishing anonymity said this under-reporting is largely due to the social stigma attached to these crimes, mishandling of cases by junior police officials, and a general lack of awareness among key stakeholders. The cultural taboo surrounding the reporting of sexual misconduct by men further exacerbates the issue.
Experts believe that the exclusion of protections for men and transgender individuals from the BNS has left many vulnerable to sexual abuse in various settings, including homes, educational institutions, workplaces, streets, prisons etc.
Senior officials have pointed out that the actual number of sexual crimes against men and transgender individuals is likely much higher than reported. The societal shame and reluctance to report such incidents, combined with poor investigative practices, contribute to the low official statistics.
Nationwide, there has been a wave of protests against the omission of Section 377 from the BNS by social activists. Activists are demanding that the government reconsider this decision and engage in comprehensive discussions on the matter.
Advocates argue that the legal framework should clearly distinguish between perpetrators and victims and should move away from age-old language such as ‘against the order of nature’.
“There is a scope to register an FIR under section 75 of the BNS which covers sexual harassment but is gender neutral and mentions woman only once in ‘showing pornographic content against the will of a woman’,” said high court advocate Vinay Puranik.
District prosecution officer Sanjeev Shrivastav said, “While the section 377 has completely been removed from BNS, it will be decided in the course of time. Its judicial interpretation will be understood and the decisions might be taken case wise. If we talk about section 75 of the BNS, type of sexual offense is not defined in it. Even if it is gender neutral, animals are not included.”