INTRODUCTION
Rape and murder are among the gravest offences recognised by any criminal justice system, as they directly violate an individual’s bodily integrity and right to life. Given their serious nature, jurisdictions across the world prescribe stringent punishments to deter offenders, protect victims and maintain public order. However, the severity of punishment alone does not define a criminal justice system; the principles governing criminal liability and sentencing are equally significant.
The prevalence of these offences continues to pose a challenge for lawmakers. According to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), 29,536 rape cases were registered in India during 2024.[1] In contrast, the United Arab Emirates records approximately 1.5 rape and sexual assault offences per 100,000 women, making it one of the countries with comparatively low reported rates of such offences.[2] Although differences in reporting practices and legal definitions prevent a direct statistical comparison, these figures provide useful context for examining how both jurisdictions respond to serious crimes.
India and the UAE have adopted different legal approaches to punishing rape and murder. India’s criminal justice system is founded upon constitutional principles of due process, judicial discretion and proportionality, whereas the UAE combines statutory criminal law with certain principles of Islamic jurisprudence, particularly in cases of intentional homicide.
UNDERSTANDING THE FOUNDATIONS OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
Before examining the punishments prescribed in India and the UAE, it is essential to understand the legal principles that determine criminal liability. A conviction for rape or murder is not based merely on the occurrence of the act itself; the prosecution must establish the essential ingredients of the offence beyond reasonable doubt. In both jurisdictions, the adjudication of these offences rests primarily on two fundamental concepts: consent in cases of rape and intention in cases of murder.
In rape prosecutions, the central issue is whether the sexual act occurred without the free and voluntary consent of the victim. Indian law expressly recognises consent as an unequivocal and voluntary agreement, while consent obtained through fear, coercion, deception, intoxication or from a minor is legally invalid.[3] Likewise, the UAE treats rape as a non-consensual act that violates the victim’s bodily autonomy and dignity. Although the statutory language differs, both legal systems regard the absence of valid consent as the foundation of criminal liability.
In cases of murder, the determining factor is the mental element (mens rea) of the accused. Mere proof of death is insufficient; the prosecution must establish that the accused acted with the intention or knowledge required by law. Courts in both India and the UAE therefore examine the surrounding circumstances, including the nature of the act, the weapon used and the conduct of the accused, before concluding whether the offence amounts to murder.
While these foundational principles are broadly similar, the two jurisdictions diverge significantly at the stage of sentencing. India primarily relies on constitutional principles and judicial discretion, whereas the UAE incorporates certain principles of Islamic jurisprudence in determining the punishment for intentional homicide. This distinction forms the basis of the comparative analysis that follows.
PUNISHMENT FOR RAPE: INDIA AND THE UAE
Both India and the United Arab Emirates treat rape as a heinous offence against the bodily integrity and dignity of an individual. While the offence is founded on the absence of valid consent in both jurisdictions, the statutory framework governing punishment differs in its structure and application.
In India, rape is defined under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), while Sections 64 to 71 prescribe punishments for various forms of the offence.[4] Depending upon the circumstances, punishment ranges from rigorous imprisonment to imprisonment for life. The BNS also prescribes enhanced punishments for aggravated forms of rape, including offences committed by police officers, public servants, armed forces personnel, gang rape, rape of minors and repeat offenders. In specified cases, particularly involving children, the law also provides for the death penalty.[5] These provisions reflect the legislature’s intention to strengthen victim protection and impose stricter consequences for aggravated sexual offences.
The UAE similarly prescribes severe punishment for rape under Federal Decree-Law No. 31 of 2021 on Crimes and Penalties. The offence is punishable with life imprisonment, while aggravated circumstances, such as offences involving minors or other particularly serious situations specified by law, may attract the death penalty.[6] In addition, non-citizens convicted of rape may be liable to deportation after serving their sentence where permitted by law.
Although both jurisdictions prescribe stringent punishments, their objectives are largely similar: to deter sexual violence, protect victims and uphold public confidence in the criminal justice system. The principal distinction lies not in the recognition of the offence but in the broader legal philosophy governing sentencing, which becomes more evident in cases of murder.
PUNISHMENT FOR MURDER: INDIA AND THE UAE
Murder is regarded as the gravest offence against human life in both India and the UAE. While both jurisdictions prescribe life imprisonment and the death penalty for intentional murder, the principles governing their imposition reflect two distinct philosophies of criminal justice.
Under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, murder is punishable with death or imprisonment for life, along with a fine.[7] However, the imposition of capital punishment is not automatic. In Bachan Singh v State of Punjab, the Supreme Court held that the death penalty should be awarded only in the ‘rarest of rare’ cases where life imprisonment is unquestionably inadequate.[8] This principle was further refined in Machhi Singh v State of Punjab, where the Court emphasised that sentencing must balance aggravating and mitigating circumstances before awarding the ultimate punishment.[9] Consequently, Indian courts retain substantial judicial discretion, ensuring that sentencing remains consistent with constitutional guarantees of fairness, proportionality and due process.
The UAE also prescribes severe punishment for intentional murder under Federal Decree-Law No. 31 of 2021 on Crimes and Penalties. Unlike India, however, the sentencing framework incorporates the Islamic law principles of Qisas and Diya. Qisas is based on the principle of retaliatory justice, permitting punishment proportionate to the harm caused. At the same time, the victim’s family may choose to forgive the offender or accept Diya (blood money) in accordance with the applicable legal framework, which may influence the outcome of the case.[10] These principles recognise the interests of the victim’s family alongside those of the State.
The distinction between the two systems therefore lies not in the seriousness with which murder is treated, but in the philosophy governing punishment. India views murder primarily as an offence against the State, leaving sentencing exclusively to constitutional courts. The UAE, while maintaining stringent punishments, adopts a hybrid approach by integrating statutory criminal law with certain principles of Islamic jurisprudence. Both systems seek justice, but they differ on the role of judicial discretion and the extent to which the victim’s family participates in the sentencing process.
CONCLUSION
India and the United Arab Emirates both recognise rape and murder as among the most serious offences and prescribe stringent punishments to protect society and deter criminal conduct. However, the comparison demonstrates that the distinction between the two jurisdictions lies not merely in the severity of punishment but in the legal principles governing its imposition.
The UAE’s criminal justice system reflects a strong deterrence-based approach, particularly through severe statutory punishments and the continued relevance of Qisas and Diya in cases of intentional homicide. These principles acknowledge the interests of the victim’s family and incorporate elements of restorative justice within the legal framework.
The Indian approach, however, offers a more balanced model by ensuring that punishment is subject to constitutional safeguards, judicial scrutiny and the principles of fairness and proportionality. The ‘rarest of rare’ doctrine ensures that capital punishment remains an exceptional measure rather than the ordinary rule, thereby protecting the fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. At the same time, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 strengthens the protection of victims through enhanced punishments for aggravated sexual offences while preserving judicial discretion in sentencing.
Ultimately, the effectiveness of a criminal justice system depends not only on the severity of punishment but also on its ability to deliver justice through fair procedures, reasoned judicial decision-making and constitutional accountability. In this regard, India’s legal framework presents a more balanced approach by safeguarding the rights of the accused without compromising the interests of victims or society.
Author(s) Name: Hrushi Rajaram Bendkoli (Government Law College, University of Mumbai)
References:
[1] Samridhi Tewari, ‘NCRB report out: Crimes against women saw minor dip in 2024, maximum cases were cruelty by husband’ (The Print, 07 May 2026) <https://theprint.in/india/ncrb-report-out-crimes-against-women-saw-minor-dip-in-2024-maximum-cases-were-cruelty-by-husband/2924248/> accessed 22 July 2026
[2] Hassan Elhais, ‘Rape Laws in the United Arab Emirates’ (Lexology, 11 May 2021) <https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=3a1e46f0-e4d6-449c-8271-b6f2cff17a01> accessed 22 July 2026
[3] Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, ss 63 Explanation 2, 64–71
[4] Ibid ss 63–71
[5] Ibid ss 64–71
[6] Federal Decree-Law No 31 of 2021 on Crimes and Penalties (UAE), art 406
[7] Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023, s 103
[8] Bachan Singh v State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 684
[9] Machhi Singh and Ors v State of Punjab (1983) 3 SCC 470
[10] Federal Decree-Law No 31 of 2021 on Crimes and Penalties (UAE), art 383