Two-fingers Test

The two fingers test is the immediate test done to examine sexual assault victims. It is also known as the virginity test. In this procedure, the status of vaginal muscles and hymen is examined to draw conclusion about whether the woman has been raped or not. The test is criticised as it does not have any scientific evidence and unreliable in the court. Also, it is a traumatising experience for the sexual assault survivors. WHO has strongly condemned the test. Government of India constituted Justice Verma Committee in 2012 after the Nirbhaya gang rape incidence to look into the laws and rules around the sexual voilence cases. The Committee recommended banning this test. The government incorporated the recommendations in the Criminal (Amendement) Act, 2013. The Supreme Court also condemned the test many times. In the recent 2022 judgement, the apex court stated that those who will still practice the two-fingers test on sexual assault victims will be declared guilty of misconduct. However, the test is still being conducted in the healthcare institutions. Proper awareness about the alternatives need to be spread to completely prohibit this test.

The two fingers test is an outdated procedure. Its origin can be traced back to outdated and patriarchal beliefs about female sexuality and virginity. Historically, it has been engrained with the belief that the condition of hymen is the determining factor for the female virginity or her previous sexual intercouse experience. This societal norm led to this test in which two fingers are inserted into the female vagina to examine the status of her hymen. It has been employed as a means of determining whether a woman or girl has been raped or sexually assaulted. It is a highly controversial and banned procedure today.

The two-finger test is an outdated medical procedure which is historically done to examine whether a girl or woman has been subjected to any sexual voilence, particularly rape. It is a controversial procedure as it is unethical and traumatising for the victim. Also the test has been found medically unnecessary.

• It is the immediate test done to determine whether a woman has experienced any sexual intercourse recently.
• In this test, medical practitioner inserts two fingers in the vagina of the victim to assess the laxity of the vaginal muscles.
• The hymen is inspected during the test to inspect whether it is torn or not to determine whether the woman had sexual intercourse or not.
• It is also known as the virginity test.

• Lack of scientific validity \: There is no scientific validity of this test. There is no medical evidence to support that the laxity of vaginal muscles is enough to determine whether the women is raped or not.
• Unethical : The test violates the medical ethics and professional standards of medical examinations and patient care. The test can be harmful for the victim which contradicts the medical ethics of maintaining the patient's well being and rights.
• Violative of human rights : The test is considered a violation of right to dignity, privacy, and bodily integrity of the victim. The insertion of fingers without their consent violates the privacy of women.
• Traumatising for the victim: The mere idea of this test is traumatising for the woman especially when she has already been traumatised by the crime that happened to her. It can also deter survivors from seeking medical care and reporting incidents of sexual violence.
• Reinforcement of stereotypes : This test perpetuates myths about virginity of the woman. According to the test only laxity of the vaginal muscles is enough to determine the virginity or incidence of sexual intercourse. It contributes to victim-blaming and stigmatisation.
• Unreliable in Court : The observations of the test is unreliable and inadmissible in the court as it has no scientific validity. The test can lead to erroneous conclusions about sexual activity and consent.

WHO strongly condemns the two-fingers test. In its handbook on sexual violence, WHO says - ‘ There is no place for virginity (or ‘two-finger’) testing; it has no scientific validity.’ WHO in the handbook provides recommendations of the medical tests based on scientific evidence and expert consensus. The handbook emphasizes the importance of trauma-informed care in the clinical management of sexual violence survivors. Hence, WHO has called for the elimination of the two-finger test.

• Government of India’s stance on the two fingers test has evolved over time in response to the growing awareness around the unethical and traumatising nature of the test.
• Government constituted the Justice Verma committee after the Nirbhaya Gangrape case of 2012. The task of the committee was to review the existing laws related to sexual violence and to recommend the amendments to strengthen the laws and rules and enhance the safety and security of women in India. Some of the recommendations made by the committee are -
  • To expand the definition of sexual assault to include a range of acts and offenses.
  • To increase the punishment against sexual violence and including life imprisonment or death penalty for the extreme sexual offence cases.
  • To strengthen the laws and rules related to sexual harrasment, acid attacks etc.
  • To improve police sensitisation related to sexual violence cases by providing adequate training.
  • To provide better care to the sexual assault survivors by proving them access to better healthcare, counselling and legal aid.
  • To ban the two-fingers test.
• To incorporate the recommendations of Justice Verma Committee, the government enacted the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, commonly known as the Nirbhaya Act. The key provisions of the Act includes -
  • Expansion of definition of sexual offences to include offences like stalking, acid attack etc.
  • Stricter punishments like life imprisonment and death penalty are prescribed by the Act for the rape victims.
  • The Act mandated the establishment of special courts for expedited trial of sexual offence cases.
  • The Act established Nirbhaya fund for financial assistance and support to survivors of sexual violence.

The Justice Verma committee recommended the ban to the two fingers test and the government also provided rape test kits as per the recommendation but still the test continues to be conducted in India.

• In Lillu vs State of Haryana case (2013), the Supreme Court condemned the two fingers test on the basis of violation of right to privacy. It also asked the government to provide better medical procedures for sexual assault cases.
• In State of Maharashtra v. Madhukar Narayan Mardikar (2017) again the Supreme Court condemned the two fingers test as discriminatory and torturing for the victims and called for its abolition.
• In State of Jharkhand Vs. Shailendra Kumar Case, 2022, Supreme Court stated that the two finger test is not permissible under law. Supreme court also said that those who will still practice the two-fingers test on sexual assault victims will be declared guilty of misconduct.

1. Forensic test : To determine sexual assault cases, swabs from genital area, mouth, and other body surfaces are collected for DNA analysis. Through these samples, genetic material of preparator is identified to determine whether the rape has occured. Samples may also be collected from under the survivor's fingernails and from any other relevant surfaces.
2. Medical History and Physical Examination: A thorough medical history-taking and physical examination is conducted to assess the survivor's overall health and any signs or symptoms of sexual assault.
3. Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) Testing: Testing for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) may be conducted to assess for the presence of infections that could indicate sexual activity or transmission of infection. Screening for STIs such as HIV/AIDS, syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, and others is conducted.

The two fingers is a highly condemned medical procedure for the survivors of sexual offencers. It has no scientific backing and is unreliable in the Court. The procedure is highly traumatising for the victims. WHO also condemns the test and recommends evidence-based procedures. Despite widespread condemnation the practice still continues. Strict enforcement of rules prohibiting the practice should be undertaken. Proper awareness should be generated in the healthcare institutions about the alternative tests to be conducted to determine sexual violence.The guidelines of Ministry of Health and Family welfare to deal with the sexual violence victims should be circulated in all government and private healthcare institutions. Workshops as recommended by Court should be conducted for the health practitioners for the alternative procedures and to inculcate sensitisation in them towards the rape survivors.