RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.

1. 16 December, 2012 once again heightened the sense of insecurity which women of this city and perhaps in most parts of this country carry in their sub conscious mind. A young lady was raped and mauled in a moving bus and left to die on the street, without a stitch of cloth on herself. Her companion was brutalized and beaten when, he attempted to intervene.

2. The news of this heinous and dastardly act spread like wild fire. There was revulsion and disgust at the sheer bestiality of the act.

3. People spilled out on roads, in spontaneous groups. Some came to express solidarity with the young lady (who at that point of time was battling for her life), some to express their disapproval at the ineffectiveness of the State apparatus and others to exhort the administration, to deal sternly with the perpetrators of the crime.

4. There were impassioned debates on these and various other aspects, connected with crime against women in the print and electronic media. The social media was not far behind. Views were expressed by all and Sundry, from the experts to lay people. Views ranged from opinions on what should have been done, to what ought to have been done. An already complex debate went into a free fall when it was discovered that one of the accused may be a juvenile. 4.1. Fortunately, the accused were caught in quick time. A Commission of Enquiry was set up with an eminent jurist Chief Justice J.S. Verma (Retd.) at its head followed by another Commission headed by Ms.Usha Mehra, a retired Judge of this Court. Since then the J.S. Verma Committee has submitted its recommendations to the Government of India, as a consequence of which an ordinance has been passed. The Government of India is mulling over a draft Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill of 2013. This Court also lent its shoulder to the issue, by setting up Fast-track Courts to deal with cases of sexual offences against women.

5. The debate is on, to lower the age of juveniles in conflict with law. Strident voices heard on television and, views expressed through print media, debate : as to how the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 (as the JJ Act) should be interpreted and how such interpretation would render JJ Act inapplicable, to such like crimes.

5.1 It is professed in some quarters that in the very least the JJ Act should be amended to either lower the age of juvenility or exclude such like crimes, committed by juveniles, from the purview of the JJ Act.

5.2 There is a contra view as well, which cautions against a knee-jerk reaction. This Section of the populace seeks status quo on JJ Act, advises against awarding death penalty to rapists or punishment of castration, whether chemical or otherwise; categorising such punishments as degrading and inhuman.

6. Both, the discourse as well as debate is on. There is, thus, undeniably a huge public interest in the prosecution of the case. With the victim dead, (she lost her battle for survival on 29.12.2012 in a Singapore Hospital), committal proceedings over and the accused charged; the trial has commenced. The six accused before the trial Court and eighty (80) witnesses, the prosecution wishes to examine; the Police; the Prosecutor; and the Court; are in the public gaze. As one speaks, one of the accused has died in custody.

7. With this background, to deny, that there is a seering public interest in the prosecution of the case, would be to act like an ostrich, whose head is buried in sand. But then, law made by Parliament which has the will of the very same people behind it, who seek access to Court proceedings, should ride this tumultuous phase.

8. The question is, therefore, what is the law on the subject. Section 327 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731 [ 327. Court to be open

(1) The place in which any Criminal Court is held for the purpose of inquiring into or trying any offence shall be deemed to be an open Court to which the public generally may have access, so far as the same can conveniently contain them: P