The controversial order has also brought back into the spotlight the issue of marital rape in a country which has stubbornly refused to criminalise it.

Earlier this week, a high court judge in the central Indian state of Chhattisgarh set free a 40-year-old man who was convicted by a trial court in 2019 of rape and unnatural sex with his wife, who died within hours of the alleged assault.

The lower court had also found the man guilty of “culpable homicide not amounting to murder”. He was sentenced to “rigorous imprisonment for 10 years” on each count, with all the sentences to run concurrently.

But on Monday, the High Court’s Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas acquitted the man of all charges, saying that since India did not recognise marital rape, the husband could not be considered guilty of non-consensual sex or any non-consensual unnatural sexual act.

The judgement has been met with anger, as activists, lawyers and campaigners renew their calls to criminalise marital rape in India.

“To watch this man walk away is unacceptable. This judgement may be correct legally, but it is ethically and morally abhorrent,” said lawyer and gender rights activist Sukriti Chauhan.

“An order that absolves a man of such a crime, to say it’s not a crime, is the darkest hour in our legal system,” she told the BBC.

“It has shaken us to the core. This needs to change and change quickly.”

Priyanka Shukla, a lawyer in Chhattisgarh, said a judgement like this “sends out the message that because you’re the husband, you have rights. And you can do anything, you can even get away with murder”.

She added that this is not the first time a court has given such a judgement, and there is always anger.

“This time, the outrage is more because it is so gruesome and the woman died.”

The court documents make for grim reading.

According to the prosecution, the incident took place on the night of 11 December 2017, when the husband, who worked as a driver, “committed unnatural sex with the victim against her will… causing her a lot of pain”.

After he left for work, she sought help from his sister and another relative, who took her to hospital where she died a few hours later.

In her statement to the police and her dying declaration to a magistrate, the woman said she became ill “due to forceful sexual intercourse by her husband”.

A dying declaration carries weight in court and legal experts say it is generally enough for conviction, unless contradicted by other evidence.

While convicting the man in 2019, the trial court had relied heavily on her dying declaration and the post-mortem report, which stated “the cause of death was peritonitis and rectal perforation” – simply put, severe injuries to her abdomen and rectum.

Justice Vyas, however, saw matters differently – he questioned the “sanctity” of the dying statement, noted that some of the witnesses had retracted their statements and, most importantly, said that marital rape was not an offence in India.

The lower court’s conviction was “a rarest of rare case”, Ms Shukla said, “probably because the woman died”.

“But what is shocking about the high court order is that there’s not even one sympathetic comment from the judge.”

Considering the nature of the assault, the high court’s order has come as a shock for many, who believe the judge should not have dismissed the case so lightly.

India is among more than 30 countries – along with Pakistan, Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia – where marital rape is not a criminal offence.

A number of petitions have been filed in recent years seeking to strike down Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which has been in existence since 1860.

The British colonial-era law mentions several “exemptions” – or situations in which sex is not rape – and one of them is “by a man with his own wife” if she is not under 15 years.

Britain outlawed marital rape in 1991 but India, which recently rewrote its criminal code, retained the regressive law in its new statute book.

The idea is rooted in the belief that consent for sex is “implied” in marriage and that a wife cannot retract it later. Campaigners say such an argument is untenable in this day and age, and that forced sex is rape, regardless of who does it.

But in a country where marriage and family are considered sacrosanct, the issue has polarised opinions and there’s strong resistance to the idea of criminalising marital rape.

The Indian government, religious leaders and men’s rights activists have strongly opposed the move.

In October last year, the government told the Supreme Court that criminalisation of marital rape would be “excessively harsh”. The federal home ministry said it “may lead to serious disturbances in the institution of marriage”.

Authorities also insist that there are enough laws to protect married women against sexual violence. But campaigners say India cannot hide behind archaic laws to deny women bodily agency.

“A lot of people say the constitution cannot enter your bedroom,” Ms Chauhan said.

“But doesn’t it grant women – like all citizens – fundamental rights to safety and security? What kind of redundant country do we live in that we remain quiet when a woman has to face this level of violence?” she asks.

Violence within marriage is rampant in India.

According to a recent government survey, 32% of married women face physical, sexual or emotional violence by their husbands and 82% have experienced sexual violence by their husbands.

And even that doesn’t give the true scale of the problem, Ms Shukla said, because a majority of women do not report violence, especially sexual violence, out of shame.

“In my experience, women are not trusted when they complain, everyone says it must be fake. The only time such cases are taken seriously is when a woman dies or the assault is particularly gruesome,” the lawyer said.

Ms Chauhan believes nothing will change until the law changes.

“We need to criminalise marital rape. The wife not getting justice after such a gruesome incident deserves a nationwide campaign, which is not born of anger but is serious [and] well thought out.”

She added that the government and men’s activists try to project it as a “man versus woman debate”.

“But the demand for criminalising marital rape is not against men, but for the safety and wellbeing of women. Is it not important to ensure women’s safety?”

It happened on Wednesday, 8 January, and Thursday, 23 January, and police have asked for any other victims to get in touch.

Met Police Det Ch Insp Amanda Prince described the events in south London as “extremely alarming and distressing” and praised the three girls for contacting the police.

She added on Wednesday: “Yesterday evening we arrested a 22-year-old man who remains in custody. I would urge anyone with more information or who may have been a victim to come forward.”

The Met is currently reviewing a total of 21 allegations made before the former Harrods boss died in 2023. It referred two of these to the IOPC in November.

On Wednesday, the police watchdog said that the Met’s Directorate of Professional Standards (DPS) will investigate those two complaints, but will do so under the IOPC’s direction.

Claims of sexual offences by Al Fayed arose in a BBC documentary, after his death, which revealed the extent of his predatory behaviour.

It was only after the BBC broadcast in September that the Met revealed it had been approached by 21 women before Al Fayed’s death who accused him of sexual offences including rape, sexual assault and trafficking. Despite this, he was never charged with any offences.

Since the documentary aired, 90 further women have contacted the force, with allegations stretching as far back as 1977. A wider investigation by the Met into the claims against Al Fayed is ongoing.

Two of the women, whose allegations were reported in 2008, complained after the documentary about how the force had handled their claims.

The complaints relate to “concerns about the quality of police response and how details came to be disclosed publicly”, a previous statement from the Met said.

IOPC director of operations Steve Noonan said: “There is widespread public concern around this case, with a significant number of allegations reported over many years while Mr Al Fayed was still alive.

“It’s important that an investigation is carried out into these complaints to identify if there were any missed opportunities or failures by officers to properly investigate these reports made back in 2008.

“The IOPC is directing the investigations as the Met’s ongoing review of the 21 allegations means it could become much wider than the two complaints.

The complainants will be kept regularly updated during the investigation, the watchdog added.

In late November, the Met announced it had launched a new investigation, which is investigating more than five people it believes may have assisted or enabled Al Fayed’s sexual offences.

The new inquiry is examining what role individuals may have played in facilitating or enabling his offending, and what opportunities they had to protect victims from his abuse, the force said.

Lawyers for Mike Jeffries have requested a hearing to determine whether he is mentally fit to stand trial on federal sex trafficking charges.

The 80-year-old was arrested alongside his partner in October and charged with running an international sex trafficking and prostitution business. Both men have pled not guilty.

A so-called competency hearing has been scheduled for June next year.

Mr Jeffries, who ran US clothing brand A&F for two decades, is accused of running a sex trafficking and prostitution business from at least 2008-15.

US prosecutors allege that he used his wealth, power and status “to traffic men for his own sexual pleasure”, and for the pleasure of his British partner Matthew Smith, 61.

They said the couple, alongside a middleman James Jacobson, 71, used force, fraud and coercion to make vulnerable, aspiring models engage in violent and exploitative sex acts.

All three men have pled not guilty to the charges and been released on bond.

The FBI began investigating last year after the BBC revealed claims Mr Jeffries and Mr Smith had sexually exploited men at events they hosted around the world.

The BBC investigation, published in October 2023, found the pair were at the centre of a sophisticated operation involving a middleman scouting young men for sex.

In the same month, Brian Bieber, Mr Jeffries’ lawyer, said his client was examined several times by a neuropsychologist who later concluded diagnostic impressions that he was suffering from two types of dementia and probable late onset Alzheimer’s disease.

In the court filing, Mr Bieber added that during an initial meeting last year the former fashion boss “did not even come close to resembling a master’s degree-educated individual, who was just nine years earlier the chief executive officer of a publicly traded company”.

As a result, Mr Bieber questioned the ability of Mr Jeffries to “rationally assist” with the possible factual and legal defences to the allegations he was facing, according to the document.

The filing comes after Mr Jeffries’ legal team sought a competency hearing, which will now be held over two days on 16 and 17 June 2025.

Federal prosecutors in the Eastern District of New York declined to comment.

Mr Jeffries stepped down as CEO and chairman of A&F in 2014, and left with a $25m (£19.9m) retirement package.

Alongside the criminal case, A&F, Mr Jeffries and his partner have been defending a civil lawsuit accusing the retailer of having funded a sex trafficking operation.

Earlier this month, Mr Jeffries sued A&F after it refused to pay his criminal defence costs, arguing the brand had agreed to indemnify him for all claims arising out of his position.

The complaints, filed separately in New York Supreme Court on Thursday, involve incidents that allegedly occurred between 2019-22.

Two of the plaintiffs allege they went to parties with Mr Combs, where he “personally offered” them alcoholic drinks which made them unconscious, before they say he raped them.

The rapper’s lawyers dismissed the lawsuits calling them “full of lies”. He remains in custody at a Brooklyn jail.

“We will prove them false and seek sanctions against every unethical lawyer who filed fictional claims against him,” the rapper’s legal team told the BBC in a statement.

The three lawsuits add to over 30 civil cases filed against Mr Combs, many of which involve similar accusations of sexual assaults dating back to the 1990s.

The rapper has been denied bail three times and is currently being held at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn.Thomas Giuffra, the attorney who filed the three lawsuits on behalf of his clients, told the BBC in an interview that more than 60 people have reached out to his office with claims against Mr Combs.

He said his office had investigated each of the claims and decided to move forward with these three cases.

He said the men decided to file the lawsuits anonymously because they’re afraid of Mr Combs and his reach and influence.

In one of the new lawsuits, an anonymous plaintiff listed as John Doe accuses Mr Combs of assault following an encounter at the Marquee nightclub in New York in 2019.

According to his complaint, he joined Mr Combs and 10 other individuals for a private afterparty when the hip-hop mogul “personally offered” him a cocktail, after which he felt disoriented. The man alleges that Mr Combs noticed his disoriented state and said: “He is ready to party.

“The man claims he blacked out and during brief moments of consciousness, he said he noticed a man and a woman recording as he was being raped by the musician.

The following morning, the man claims he was given about $2,500 (£2,000) by the man and woman recording the assault, who said the money came from Mr Combs.

Another anonymous plaintiff alleges that he attended a party at Mr Combs’ East Hampton home in the summer of 2020. After consuming alcohol provided by Mr Combs, the man claims he began to lose consciousness.

While “fading in and out of consciousness”, he alleges that Mr Combs and others from Bad Boys Entertainment “took turns raping him”.

The third anonymous man claims he met Mr Combs in 2006 and began working for him.

He alleges that in February 2020, he met Mr Combs at a hotel to discuss unpaid wages and during that meeting, he claims the rapper prepared him a drink that he believes was drugged.

He says he lost consciousness and woke up to find Mr Combs assaulting him.Mr Combs allegedly told him he would look like an idiot if he went to the police and that no-one would ever believe him, the lawsuit states.

Mr Combs is also separately facing federal criminal charges in a sex-trafficking and racketeering conspiracy.

Authorities allege the star orchestrated a long-running scheme involving sexual abuse and exploitation, including arranging drug-fuelled events featuring male sex workers.

Mr Combs has pleaded not guilty to all the accusations.

His legal team has repeatedly asserted his innocence.

The trial is scheduled for May.

Ella Janneh was awarded more than £200,000 in damages following her civil claim in June, after the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) decided not to press charges against her therapist Michael Lousada.

Ms Janneh has now launched a campaign calling on the government to introduce statutory regulation.

The government has urged people to use practitioners who have signed up to a voluntary register accredited by the Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care (PSA).

Ms Janneh, who has waived her right to anonymity, visited Mr Lousada in his clinic in Belsize Park, north London, in 2016.

She told the court during the trial that she had visited him after suffering panic attacks during consensual sex because she was abused as a child.

The High Court heard the therapist had said his penis was “like a laser beam” that could “burn up trauma” during the £750 session.

The court also heard that Ms Janneh did not ask for or consent to the use of penile penetration as a “therapeutic technique”.

When the CPS chose not to prosecute Mr Lousada, Ms Janneh then pursued a claim in the civil court for “trespass to the person”.

After her eight-year battle for justice, Ms Janneh says she now wants to campaign for the introduction of a new regulatory body to “keep the public safe from therapists who abuse their power over clients in therapy”.

She said: “It is shameful that presently the onus is placed on the public to keep ourselves safe.

“It’s time we address this issue. And victims’ voices must be at the centre of this change.”

Currently anyone in the UK can call themselves a therapist, psychotherapist or counsellor without standardised qualifications or training.

The government can bring certain professions under statutory regulation, but any introduction of a new profession to this level of oversight would be subjected to a statutory three-month consultation and parliamentary procedure.

Ms Janneh said it was time for the therapy and counselling sector “to agree to be statutorily regulated”.

This week, she chaired a meeting to start the campaign with the support of her solicitors Leigh Day.

In a statement, the firm said: “The closed-doors discussion brought together key stakeholders including UK professional bodies to discuss the issue and seek their support.”

It said many agreed that there should be a register of therapists that was regulated by the government and that “a coalition” would pursue what was discussed.

Leigh Day solicitor Cat Rubens said the meeting “really highlighted the need for better regulation in therapy”.

She added: “Counselling should be a safe space.

“With better regulation we can ensure that there are measures in place to better protect members of the public from harm.”

A government spokesperson said it commended Ms Janneh for her “bravery in speaking out”.

“Taking advantage of someone who is seeking help while at their most vulnerable is reprehensible and we would urge anyone affected to come forward so those responsible can face justice.

“Anyone seeking therapy deserves to have confidence and trust in their healthcare professional, which is why we urge the use of qualified practitioners on registers accredited by the PSA.

“To meet the standards for PSA accreditation, an organisation must have a focus on public protection and robust processes for handling complaints against practitioners.”

Tony Buzbee said that his team had received about 3,000 calls since he held a news conference calling for clients in October.

He has already issued 20 lawsuits from men and women seeking damages from the musician; and says that “realistically” the final total will be “about 100 to 150”. Others will not make it to court because the time limit for filing claims has expired in certain states.

Mr Combs has denied all the charges against him, calling the accusations “sickening” and the result of people looking for a “quick payday”.

His lawyers have characterised the multiple civil lawsuits, including the claims of 300 potential victims, as a part of a “reckless media circus”.

They said Mr Buzbee’s press conference, and the creation of a toll-free phone number for tip-offs, were “clear attempts to garner publicity”.

In a statement to the BBC, his attorney Erica Wolff said: “Mr Combs has full confidence in the facts and the integrity of the judicial process.

“In court, the truth will prevail: That Mr. Combs never sexually assaulted or trafficked anyone – man or woman, adult or minor.”

The musician is currently being held in Manhattan’s Metropolitan Detention Center, awaiting trial on separate criminal charges of sex trafficking and racketeering, which he also denies.

Mr Buzbee, whose practice is based in Houston, is an outsized character in US legal circles, once described by the New York Times as “a big, mean, ambitious, tenacious, fire-breathing Texas trial lawyer”.

A former Marine and a TV show host, he made his name suing the energy giant BP after an explosion at an oil refinery in Texas City killed 15 people; and successfully defended former Texas governor Rick Perry against abuse-of-power allegations.

More recently, he helped a sizeable group of women reach out-of-court settlements with American Football player Deshaun Watson over allegations he had sexually assaulted them during private massage sessions.

His involvement with Mr Combs began last year – after his co-counsel Andrew Van Arsdale, who previously represented hundreds of victims in a sexual abuse lawsuit against the Boy Scouts of America, began receiving calls about the star.

“I think he got a little bit overwhelmed, and he realised that this might be more than he could handle [on his own]”, Buzbee says.

After agreeing to help, Buzbee asked potential victims to come forward via an Instagram post. In the next 10 days, he estimates his team received 3,000 calls.

Those claims were screened by a team of lawyers and former law enforcement officials, who arrived at a list of clients with cases “that are viable, that have been thoroughly vetted, that will ultimately be filed”, he says.

“We still get [calls] every single day,” he added. “I think that the potential [number of] cases is probably in the 300 range, but I think realistically, it’ll ultimately be about 100 to 150.

“The alleged victims include a roughly equal number of men and women; whose accusations span a 20-year period.

Among them are a woman who claims Mr Combs raped her in a hotel room in 2004 when she was a 19-year-old college student; and an aspiring young musician who alleges the musician drugged him and forced him to perform oral sex when he was 10 years old.

Lawyers for Mr Combs have denied the allegations, saying in a statement to the BBC that he “has never sexually assaulted anyone – adult or minor, man or woman”.

The lawsuits have so far been filed anonymously, with the alleged victims referred to in court documents as John Doe or Jane Doe.

However, Mr Combs’ laywers have asked the courts to release their identities so he can adequately prepare for any potential trial.

In three cases so far, including that of the 19-year-old woman, a judge has ruled that they will have to reveal their names for their claims to move forward.”It happens a lot,” Mr Buzbee told the BBC. “If the plaintiff is forced to reveal her or his or her identity, Mr Combs hopes that they will quietly go away and never bring the claim again.

“The good news is, that’s not going to happen. That’s something I screened for… so if they’re forced to reveal their identity, they’ll reveal their identity, and we’ll keep pressing forward.”

Mr Buzbee added that he had taken similar measures in the DeShaun Watson case, where several women publicly attached their names to the lawsuits following a challenge from the sportsman’s lawyers.

One lawsuit has received particular attention because it claims other celebrities were involved in Mr Combs’ alleged crimes.

The case, filed in New York in October, regards a 13-year-old who claims she became disorientated and dizzy after accepting a drink at one of Mr Combs’ parties.

Soon after, she claims that a man, originally identified as “Celebrity A” removed her clothes and raped her, while Mr Combs and a woman named as “Celebrity B” watched.

On Sunday, the plaintiff updated the lawsuit to identity the first celebrity as the rap legend Jay-Z.In an extensive statement, Jay-Z, whose real name is Shawn Carter, called the claims “idiotic” and accused Mr Buzbee of attempting to blackmail him by threatening to make his name public.

“My heart and support goes out to true victims in the world, who have to watch how their life story is dressed in costume for profitability by this ambulance chaser in a cheap suit,” he added.

The musician had previously filed an anonymous lawsuit in Los Angeles, accusing Mr Buzbee of “shamelessly” trying to extort him.

Mr Buzbee fired back that the “frivolous” lawsuit was a “last-ditch attempt” to stop Mr Carter’s name being made public.

“I am a US Marine,” he wrote in an Instagram statement. “I won’t be silenced or intimidated. Neither will my clients.”

Mr Combs’ legal team also deny the claims, and said the extortion charge against Mr Buzbee “expose his barrage of lawsuits… for what they are: Shameless publicity stunts, designed to extract payments from celebrities who fear having lies spread about them, just as lies have been spread about Mr Combs”.

The back and forth has only fuelled speculation that more high-profile music industry figures will become ensnared in the upcoming trials.

Speaking to the BBC, Mr Buzbee called that eventuality “very likely”.

“If you just look at the conduct that’s being alleged, it’s pretty ubiquitous. There was a culture that was created, a party culture, where anything goes,” he says.

“There was just a general feeling that he [Mr Combs] was above the law, that he could do whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted, with whomever he wanted.”

Social media has seen a flurry of speculation, linking people to Mr Combs’ alleged crimes – based on little more than photos of showbusiness parties in the 1990s and 2000s.

Needless to say, there is no evidence to back up those allegations.

There have also been widely-discredited fakes, including a tell-all biography purportedly written by Mr Combs’ late partner, Kim Porter; and a viral song, in which Justin Bieber purportedly sang, “I lost myself at a Diddy party”. The latter turned out to be an AI-generated fake.

Lawyers for Mr Combs have argued that the number of “false and outrageous” claims being made by “government agents, plaintiffs’ attorneys, and others with questionable motives” could be “perceived as prejudicing potential jurors”.

Mr Buzbee disagrees.”Obviously, the people who come into the court as jurors, don’t come in in a vacuum,” he tells the BBC.

“They read the press, and they know what’s going on, but I think most people are willing to say, ‘Let’s judge this claim on its merits. What is the proof and what is the defence?'”

In the end, Mr Buzbee’s clients may face a long wait to have their cases heard in court.

Jennie VonCannon, a former federal prosecutor with experience of sex trafficking and racketeering cases, says the criminal trial against Mr Combs will have to conclude before the civil claims can proceed.

“That’s because the Fifth Amendment gives you the right to remain silent,” she told the BBC.

“So you need the criminal case to go first, because if you made statements in the civil cases in order to defend yourself, you could possibly incriminate yourself.”

The Grand Jury hearings for Mr Combs’ criminal trial have continued since charges were filed against him in September.

Some of the alleged victims who are suing him in civil court are believed to have given testimony in these hearings. VonCannon says the government could easily amend their case as a result.

“There’s a school of thought that no investigation is ever complete,” she says.”It sounds like the government is still actively producing discovery, so it’s possible they will supersede [replace or amend] the indictment, and even add more defendants.”

The criminal trial is currently scheduled to begin in May 2025.