What was the central issue in this case?

Whether the facts proved an attempt to commit rape under Section 376 read with Section 511 IPC, or only offences like kidnapping (Section 366) and outraging modesty (Section 354).

Why did the Supreme Court reject attempt to rape here?

Penetration or a clear attempt at penetration was not proved. There was no undressing by the accused or direction to the girl to undress, so essential steps toward penetration were missing.

What was the final conviction and sentence?

Conviction under Sections 376/511 IPC was set aside. The accused was convicted under Sections 366 and 354 IPC with sentences of five years and two years, to run concurrently.

What does ‘modesty’ mean under Section 354 IPC?

Modesty is a quality associated with women; conduct that shocks a woman’s sense of decency amounts to outraging modesty under Section 354 IPC.

What is the key student takeaway?

Attempt begins when there is a direct move toward penetration in rape cases. If that step is absent, courts may apply Sections 354 and 366 IPC based on the facts.

Tarkeshwar Sahu v. State of Bihar (now Jharkhand)

Quick Summary

The Supreme Court drew a clear line between preparation and attempt in sexual offences. Because there was no proof of penetration or even an attempt to penetrate, the Court set aside the conviction for attempt to rape (Sections 376/511 IPC). It instead convicted the accused for kidnapping under Section 366 and outraging modesty under Section 354.

Attempt needs a direct move toward penetration in rape cases.
If that step is missing, apply Sections 354/366 as per facts.

```

Issues

Can the accused be held guilty for attempt to rape under Section 376 read with Section 511 IPC?

Rules

Section 376 IPC: For rape, penetration is essential. Even slight penetration is enough.
Section 511 IPC: Attempt begins when the accused takes a direct step to commit the offence, going beyond preparation.
Section 354 IPC: Assault or criminal force intending to outrage a woman’s modesty.
Section 366 IPC: Kidnapping/abducting a woman with intent to force or seduce her to illicit intercourse.

Facts (Timeline)

18 Feb 1998, ~1:30 a.m. — 12-year-old Tara Muni Kumari stepped out for nature’s call.

The accused allegedly took her to his gumti nearby with sexual intent.

She raised an alarm; neighbors and her father (PW1) rushed in.

Because of the quick response, the accused could not proceed further.

~2:30 a.m. — FIR lodged within an hour.

Charge: Sections 376/511 IPC (attempt to rape). Ten witnesses examined.

Some witnesses turned hostile, but the prosecutrix admitted the accused tried and failed due to her protest.

Trial court: Guilty; 7 years RI. High Court: Appeal dismissed.

Arguments

Appellant

No proof of penetration or attempt at penetration.
Acts were, at best, preparatory, not an attempt.
Conviction under Sections 376/511 IPC not sustainable.

Respondent

Prompt FIR and consistent testimonies support guilt.
Hostility of some witnesses does not break the core chain.
Conviction for attempt to rape should stand.

Judgment

The Supreme Court set aside the conviction under Sections 376/511 IPC. It held there was no penetration and no clear attempt to penetrate. The Court convicted the accused under Section 366 IPC (five years) and Section 354 IPC (two years), sentences to run concurrently.

Ratio

Rape requires penetration; even slight penetration suffices. Absence of penetration or a direct step toward it negates “attempt”.
Where facts show force and intent without the necessary steps toward penetration, Sections 354 and 366 may apply.
“Modesty” of a woman is protected by Section 354 IPC; acts shocking decency outrage that modesty.

Why It Matters

This case is a classroom-ready guide to the preparation–attempt divide. It prevents over-extension of attempt to rape where the core step toward penetration is missing, while ensuring accountability through 354/366 IPC where appropriate.

Key Takeaways

Attempt in rape = a direct move toward penetration.
Without that step, consider 354/366 IPC based on facts.
Prompt FIR and credible testimony still matter to prove other offences.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: “Penetration Proves Attempt; Else 354–366 Prevent.”

Ask: Any step toward penetration shown?
If Yes: Consider 376/511 IPC.
If No: Map facts to 354 (modesty) or 366 (kidnapping intent).

IRAC Outline

Issue

Does the evidence show an attempt to rape under 376/511 IPC?

Rule

Rape requires penetration; attempt begins with a direct step toward it. (376, 511 IPC)

Application

No undressing; no instruction to undress; no act showing an immediate move to penetrate.

Conclusion

No attempt to rape; convictions proper under 354 and 366 IPC.

Glossary

Attempt: A direct move toward completing a crime after preparation.
Modesty (Sec 354): A woman’s sense of decency protected by law; shocking conduct outrages it.
Section 366 IPC: Kidnapping/abduction to force or seduce to illicit intercourse.