A DELHI court has found a brutal sex attack which killed a 65-year-old woman was not rape because she didn’t appear to have fought back and “was beyond the age of menopause”.

As the nation struggles to come to grips with a string of sex killings, usually of very young girls, the latest verdict is seen as yet another example of officialdom’s lack of comprehension as to what rape actually is.

The 65-year-old woman was found dead in her home in 2010 with her 45-year-old attacker asleep, drunk, alongside her. Her body was smeared in alcohol and she had suffered internal injuries in the assault.

However investigators noted there was little sign of bruising or scratching which would indicate a struggle.

Late last week, Delhi High Court Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Mukta Gupta ruled on an appeal for the attacker’s prior conviction that while intercourse had been “forceful, it was not forcible.”

The judges found the accused “neither had any intention nor knowledge that such a forceful act of sexual intercourse would cause the death of the woman”.

The judges noted that the case for rape was also reduced by the fact the woman was “aged around 65—70, thus beyond the age of menopause.”

The accused was therefore acquitted.

“We are of the opinion that it has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant committed sexual intercourse with the deceased contrary to her wishes or her consent.”

Their finding has caused uproar in legal and women’s rights circles.

“The judges are not comprehending what a crime of rape is, that it can be committed on a 1-month-old or an 80-year old,” one lawyer said.