IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
FR. JOSEPH KUZHINJALIL – Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Crl. M.C. No. 2370 of 2023
Decided On : 10-09-2024
Disclosure - Identity of Victim - IPC Section 228A - The court interpreted Section 228A of the IPC, emphasizing the prohibition against disclosing the identity of victims of sexual offences, and concluded that the publication in question did indeed reveal identifying information, thus upholding the prosecution's case.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, accused of disclosing the identity of a victim in a sexual offence case through a publication, sought to quash the final report against them, arguing that the publication did not reveal the victim's identity.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that while the victim's name was not explicitly mentioned, the publication contained sufficient details that could lead to the victim's identification, thus attracting the provisions of Section 228A of the IPC.
Issues: Whether the publication by the accused disclosed the identity of the victim in violation of Section 228A of the IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the publication contained information that could lead to the identification of the victim, thereby constituting an offence under Section 228A of the IPC.
Result: The Criminal Miscellaneous Case is dismissed.
ORDER :
1. Accused Nos. 1 and 2 in C.C. No. 1576/2018 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Angamaly, arose out of Crime No. 2078/2017 of Nedumbassery police station, Ernakulam Rural, are the petitioners herein and they seek the following relief:
To quash Annexure -A5 final report in C.C. 1576/2018 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Angamaly.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Additional Director General of Prosecution and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the relevant documents.
3. As per Annexure A5 -copy of the Final Report placed by the learned counsel for the petitioners, prosecution alleges commission of offence punishable under Section 228A(1)(3) of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘the IPC’ hereinafter) and the allegation of the prosecution is that, the 1st accused, who is the printer and publisher of the Rashtra Deepika Publications, Kottayam and the 2nd accused, who is the Chief Editor of Rashtra Deepika Publications, Kottayam, published the statements of the witnesses in Crime No. 297/2017 of Nedumbassery Police Station, alleging commission of offences punishable under Section 376 of the IPC, among other offences and thereby, disclosed the identity of the victim in the above crime, by printing and publishing the same in Rashtra Deepika Evening Daily, dated 20.12.2017.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners read out the allegations and also placed the so called printed and published newspaper, with reference to page Nos.3 and 5 to contend that, the so called publication, either directly or by indirect means not disclosed anything so as to identify the victim in Crime No. 297/2017 of Nedumbassery Police Station and therefore, the entire Final Report is non-est in the eye of law and the same is liable to be quashed. He also would the Investigating Officer in Crime No. 297/2017 regarding disclosure of the identity of the victim and other details in the above crime and alleging the same, a petition was filed as C.M.P. No. 985/2017, where the learned Magistrate passed an order, giving strict directions to him to take abundant caution to see that the materials which are the part of the final report, not to be leaked for the media trial which would eventually cause interference with administration of justice.
5. Opposing quashment, the learned Additional Director General of Prosecution pointed out the relevant texts in page Nos.3 and 5 of the Rashtra Deepika Evening Daily, dated 20.12.2017 and submitted that, even though the name of the victim not specifically disclosed, on reading the text together, the identity could be easily traced and therefore, offence under Section 228A(1)(3) of the IPC, would definitely attract in the facts of this case. Therefore, quashment is not liable to be allowed.
6. Coming to Section 228A of the IPC, the same provides as under:
228A. Disclosure of identity of the victim of certain offences:
(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 shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years and shall also be liable to fine.
7. Going by the specific wordings in Section 228A(1) of the IPC, the ingredients to bring home the said offence is, printing or publishing the name or any matter which may make known the identity of any person against whom one of the offences mentioned therein is alleged or found to have been committed.
8. The crucial question herein is, whether there are materials in the publication effected in page Nos.3 and 5 of Rashtra Deepika Evening Daily, dated 20.12.2017, which would make known the identity of the victim in Crime No. 297/2017, so as to attract an offence under Section 228A(1) of the IPC?
9. On scanning the
Nipun Saxena & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. 2019 (4) KLT 159
AI
The court established that any publication revealing identifying details of a victim in sexual offence cases violates Section 228A of the IPC, regardless of whether the victim's name is mentioned.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to protect the identity of victims of sexual offences, as mandated by Section 228-A of the Indian Penal Code and the guidelines issued by ....
Victims of sexual offenses, especially minors, are entitled to confidentiality in legal proceedings, allowing appeals without disclosing identities.
The court upheld the framing of charges against the petitioner for disclosing the identity of a minor victim, establishing a prima facie case based on evidence of involvement in the dissemination of ....
The imperative requirement of maintaining anonymity of victims of sexual offences and the plenary protection granted to judges under the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory registration of FIR for a cognizable offence, the necessity to protect the identity of victims of sexual offences, and the requiremen....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that statutory provisions and directions issued by the Supreme Court provide adequate safeguards to protect the interests of victims of sexual offe....
The court established that victim privacy must be protected even while ensuring the accused's right to a fair trial, allowing only inspection of sensitive evidence.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.