IMPORTANT POINTS
No person can print or publish in print, electronic, social media, etc. the name of the victim or even in a remote manner disclose any facts which can lead to the victim being identified and which should make her identity known to the public at large.
In cases where the victim is dead or of unsound mind the name of the victim or her identity should not be disclosed even under the authorization of the next of the kin, unless circumstances justifying the disclosure of her identity exist, which shall be decided by the competent authority, which at present is the Sessions Judge.
FIRs relating to offences under Sections 376, 376A, 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, 376DB or 376E of IPC and offences under POCSO shall not be put in the public domain.
In case a victim files an appeal under Section 372 CrPC, it is not necessary for the victim to disclose his/her identity and the appeal shall be dealt with in the manner laid down by law.
The police officials should keep all the documents in which the name of the victim is disclosed, as far as possible, in a sealed cover and replace these documents by identical documents in which the name of the victim is removed in all records which may be scrutinised in the public domain.
All the authorities to which the name of the victim is disclosed by the investigating agency or the court are also duty bound to keep the name and identity of the victim secret and not disclose it in any manner except in the report which should only be sent in a sealed cover to the investigating agency or the court.
An application by the next of kin to authorise disclosure of identity of a dead victim or of a victim of unsound mind under Section 228A(2)(c) of IPC should be made only to the Sessions Judge concerned until the Government acts under Section 228A(1)(c) and lays down a criteria for identifying such social welfare institutions or organisations.
In case of minor victims under POCSO, disclosure of their identity can only be permitted by the Special Court, if such disclosure is in the interest of the child.
All the States/Union Territories requested to set up at least one ‘one stop centre’ in every district within one year.

Headnote:(a) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 228A r/w Section 327(2), Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Punishment for disclosure of identity of victim of rape u/s 376, 376A, 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, 376DB or 376E – Identity does not mean only name – Requirement of trial of rape cases in camera – held, no person can print or publish the name of the victim or disclose any facts which can lead to the victim being identified and which should make her identity known to the public at large – Police has to mention name and identity of the victim in its records – Police directed to keep all the documents in which the name of the victim is disclosed in a sealed cover and replace these documents by identical documents in which the name of the victim is removed in all records open to scrutiny by people – The sealed cover can be filed in the court along with the report filed under Section 173 CrPC. (Para 6, 7, 11, 12, 13)
       (1996) 2 SCC 384 – Relied upon
       (b) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 228A (2)(b) – Name and identity of a major victim can be disclosed with her prior authority in writing. (Para 14)
       (c) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 228A (2)(c) – In case of minor victim, section 228A will not apply – Words ‘or minor’ should for all intents and purposes be deemed to be deleted from section 228A(2)(c). (Para 15)
       (d) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 228A – Name and identity of rape victim – Not necessary for even launching a campaign – Like Nirbhaya – Held, name of victim or her identity should not be disclosed even under authorization of next of kin, without permission of the competent authority, i.e., Sessions Judge/magistrate concerned. (Para 17, 18, 21)
       (e) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 228A – Disclosure of identity of murdered rape victim – Body not identifiable – Directed, photo can be published without disclosing the fact of rape. (Para 21)
       (f) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 228A(3) r/w Article 142, Constitution of India – Disclosure of identity of victim to social or welfare organization – Till date no such organisation recognized by any Government. (Para 21)
       (g) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 228A(3) r/w section 327(2) CrPC – Trial in camera – Press can report that the case was fixed before Court and some witnesses were examined – It can report for what purpose the case was listed but it cannot report what transpired inside the court or what was the statement of the victim or the witnesses – Evidence cannot be disclosed. (Para 22)
       SLP(C) No. 24978 of 2018 – Referred
       (h) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 228A – No court, including Supreme Court, should not indicate name of the rape victim in its judgment. (Para 25)
       (1996) 2 SCC 384; (2003) 8 SCC 551 – Relied upon
       (i) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 228A r/w section 372 CrPC and High Court Rules – In case accused is acquitted and victim wants to file appeal – Held, she can file the appeal in a pseudonymous name like ‘X’ or ‘Y’ along with an application, in sealed cover, for permission of the court for non-disclosure of her name in the appeal – The documents requiring her name like power of attorney can be enclosed in the sealed cover. (Para 27)
       (j) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Act – Section 24(5), 33(7) and 37 – Name and identity of the child not to be disclosed at any time during the course of investigation or trial and the identity of the child is protected from the public or media, except with permission of the court – Section 37 therefore requires the trial in camera. (Para 30)
       (k) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Act – Section 23(2) – Identity of the child (even dead victim) should not be disclosed directly or indirectly – Duty of media – ‘Any other particulars’ will have to be given the widest amplitude and cannot be read only ejusdem generis. (Para 31, 32, 34)
       2018 CrLJ 3146; 2017 CrLJ 3893 – Cited with approval
       (l) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – Section 23 – Violation of section 23(2) is an offence u/s 23(4). (Para 33)
       (m) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – Need for courts to be child friendly emphasized. (Para 41)
       (n) Criminal justice delivery – One stop centres for children and women – Can be used as a central police station registering all crimes against women and children in the town/city – Need for trained staff, counselors and psychiatrists – Medical facilities should also be available – Conferencing facility for mandatory recording statements of victims u/s 164 CrPC – like “BHAROSA” in Hyderabad. (Para 42)
       Facts of the case:
       How and in what manner the identity of adult victims of rape and children who are victims of sexual abuse should be protected so that they are not subjected to unnecessary ridicule, social ostracisation and harassment, is one of the issues which arises in these cases.
       Finding of the Court:
       There is need for child friendly courts and one stop centres for children and women.
       Result: Petition disposed of. Directions given.

Judgement Key Points

Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points regarding the protection of victim identity:

1. Prohibition on Disclosing Identity No person can print or publish the name of the victim or disclose any facts that could lead to the victim being identified or make her identity known to the public at large. This applies to print, electronic, and social media. (!) (!) (!)

2. Definition of "Identity" "Identity" is not limited to just the name. It includes any matter which may make the victim's identity known. This includes specific details like the name of the State Board Examination, the name of the village, or footage where the face is blurred but other identifying features (relatives, neighbors) are visible. (!) (!) (!)

3. Police Record Keeping Police officials must keep all documents disclosing the victim's name in a sealed cover. They should replace these documents with identical copies where the name is removed in all records open to public scrutiny. The sealed cover can be filed in court along with the report under Section 173 CrPC. (!) (!) (!)

4. Disclosure to Authorities Authorities receiving documents with the victim's name are duty-bound to keep the identity secret. They can only disclose it in reports sent in a sealed cover to the investigating agency or the court. These records cannot be furnished under the Right to Information Act, 2015. (!) (!) (!)

5. Authorization by Next of Kin (Dead/Unsound Mind Victims) Even with the authorization of the next of kin, the name or identity of a dead victim or a victim of unsound mind should not be disclosed unless circumstances justify it. Such applications must be made to the Sessions Judge, not automatically granted. (!) (!) (!)

6. Appeals by Victims If a victim files an appeal under Section 372 CrPC, they are not required to disclose their identity. They can file the appeal under a pseudonym (e.g., 'X' or 'Y') and enclose documents containing their real name in a sealed cover for verification by the court. (!) (!) (!)

7. Minor Victims under POCSO For minor victims under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, disclosure of identity is permitted only if the Special Court allows it in writing, and only if such disclosure is in the "interest of the child." Making a child a symbol of protest is generally not considered in their interest. (!) (!) (!)

8. Media Reporting Restrictions Media cannot report what transpired inside the court, the statements of the victim or witnesses, or evidence during in-camera trials. They can only report that a case was listed and that witnesses were examined, without revealing details. (!) (!) (!)

9. Judgments and Courts No court, including the Supreme Court, should indicate the name of the rape victim in its judgment. The anonymity of the victim must be maintained throughout the proceedings. (!) (!) (!)

10. One Stop Centres All States/Union Territories are directed to set up at least one 'one stop centre' in every district within one year. These centers should provide medical facilities, counseling, and have video conferencing capabilities to record statements without the victim needing to appear in court. (!) (!) (!)

JUDGMENT

Deepak Gupta, J.

1. How and in what manner the identity of adult victims of rape and children who are victims of sexual abuse should be protected so that they are not subjected to unnecessary ridicule, social ostracisation and harassment, is one of the issues which arises in these cases.

2. We are dividing this judgment into two parts. The first part deals with the victims of the offence of rape under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’) and the second part deals with victims who are subjected to offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO’).

3. In this judgment any reference to “media” will include all types of media including press, electronic and social media etc..

Ist Part

4. Unfortunately, in our society, the victim of a sexual offence, especially a victim of rape, is treated worse than the perpetrator of the crime. The victim is innocent. She has been subjected to forcible sexual abuse. However, for no fault of the victim, society instead of empathizing with the victim, starts treating her as an ‘untouchable’. A victim of rape is treated like a “pariah” and ostracised from society. Many times, even her family refuses to accept her back into their fold. The harsh reality is that many times cases of rape do not even get reported because of the false notions of so called ‘honour’ which the family of the victim wants to uphold. The matter does not end here. Even after a case is lodged and FIR recorded, the police, more often than not, question the victim like an accused. If the victim is a young girl who has been dating and going around with a boy, she is asked in intimidating terms as to why she was dating a boy. The victim’s first brush with justice is an unpleasant one where she is made to feel that she is at fault; she is the cause of the crime.

5. If the victim is strong enough to deal with the recriminations and insinuations made against her by the police, she normally does not find much succour even in court. In Court the victim is subjected to a harsh cross-examination wherein a lot of questions are raised about the victim’s morals and character. The Presiding Judges sometimes sit like mute spectators and normally do not prevent the defence from asking such defamatory and unnecessary questions. We want to make it clear that we do not, in any manner, want to curtail the right of the defence to cross-examine the prosecutrix, but the same should be done with a certain level of decency and respect to women at large. Over a period of time, lot of effort has been made to sensitise the courts, but experience has shown that despite the earliest admonitions, the first as far back as in 1996, State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh, (1996) 2 SCC 384 the Courts even today reveal the identity of the victim.

6. Section 228A was introduced in the IPC vide Amendment Act No. 43 of 1983 with effect from 25.12.1983 and reads as follows:

“228A. Disclosure of identity of the victim of certain offences etc.-
(1) Whoever prints or publishes the name or any matter which may make known the identity of any person against whom an offence under section 376, section 376A, section 376AB, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D, section 376DA, section 376DB or section 376E is alleged or found to have been committed (hereafter in this section referred to as the victim) shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years and shall also be liable to fine.
(2) Nothing in sub-section (1) extends to any printing or publication of the name or any matter which may make known the identity of the victim if such printing or publication is-
(a) by or under the order in writing of the officer-in-charge of the police station or the police officer making the investigation into such offence acting in good faith for the purposes of such investigation; or
(b) by, or withthe authorisation in writing of, the victim; or
(c) where the victim is dead or minor or of u

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2018 Supreme(SC) 1238

Cases Referred (6)