The state has 13 special courts to hear cases of atrocities against women. The state government has decided to set up 100 fast-track courts in the next five years. The procedure to reserve 25 of these 100 fast-track courts to deal exclusively with crimes against women is underway. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay. These are important steps taken by the legislature to protect stateswomen, protect their modesty and provide them with a free environment. The changes were made in accordance and in a form that would empower women themselves to combat the offenses. Explanation of the terms “sexual intercourse” and “penetration” These two terms are redefined after the 2013 amendment before 2013, sexual intercourse was only intended to be penile-vaginal penetration. Courts have interpreted the term sexual intercourse as "mere minimal or partial penetration of the male organ into the labia majora or into the vulva or pudenda is sufficient to constitute 'sexual intercourse'." The courts have insisted that the depth of penetration is immaterial. It is also clarified that it is not necessary for injuries to be present on the woman's private part to constitute rape. The hymen does not need to be broken. Thus the essential condition of rape is penetration and not ejaculation. Ejaculation without penetration will constitute attempted rape and not actual rape. These conditions have been expressly mentioned by the Supreme Court in the case of “State of Uttar Pradesh v. Babulnath”. The court in this case, while examining the essential elements of rape, observed that "To constitute the offense of rape, it is not at all necessary that there be complete penetration of the male organ with emission of semen and rupture of the hymen The slightest piercing by a male organ inside the labia majora or the vulva or pudenda with or without emission of semen or even an attempt at penetration into the intimate part of the victim would be more than enough. for the purposes of Sections 375 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code That being said, it is quite possible to legally commit the offense of rape even without causing any injury to the genitals or leaving any seminal stain. 'expand the scope of section 375 to include any corporal penetration as rape. was raised in the case of Smt Sudesh Jhaku v. KCJ & Ors. The petitioners wanted to broaden the scope of the definition to include the penetration of any part of the male body into any orifice of the female body. This proposal was, however, rejected by the court, which was not in favor of changing the existing definition of the term. The court said it was necessary to avoid chaos and confusion in the society regarding the new definition of rape and hence Section 375 should not be amended. If the logic of the Supreme Court verdict making marital rape of a child is considered sound, marital rape of adults should no longer have legal sanction. The court said it could not distinguish between a married child and an unmarried child in the context of rape, as this would create two classes of people, leading to discrimination and a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law. This reasoning would also apply to adult women. Furthermore, if the Supreme Court holds that marriage is personal and not institutional, the same standard should also apply.