HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J.
Rekhit Pandel – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 177/2022 in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 5536/2021
Decided On : 06-07-2022
Privacy - Victim's Identity - The court directed the removal of the victim's father's name and residential address from the order, in line with the legal provisions prohibiting the disclosure of the identity of victims of sexual offenses.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant sought directions to remove the victim's father's name and residential address from a court order that disclosed the victim's identity, based on the legal provisions prohibiting such disclosure.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the order disclosed the identity of the victim, which was prohibited by legal provisions, and therefore directed the removal of the identifying information from the order.
Issues: Disclosure of Victim's Identity
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the provisions of Section 228-A IPC, Section 74 of Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, and Section 23 of the POCSO Act, as well as the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Bombay High Court, to support the decision to remove the victim's identifying information from the order.
Final Decision: The court directed the removal of the victim's father's name and residential address from the order and instructed that the order be uploaded again only after deleting the identifying information.
JUDGMENT
1. This criminal miscellaneous application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicant seeking necessary directions to remove/delete name of father of the victim as also her residential address which leads to disclosure of her identity, from the order of this Court dated 18.10.2021 passed in SB Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.5536/2021.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, relying upon a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case of Nipun Saxena & Anr. versus Union of India & Ors.: (2019) 2 SCC 703, submitted that identity of the victim of an offence of rape and/or under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for brevity "the POCSO Act) cannot be published in public domain. He submits that the order of this Court 18.10.2021 in the aforesaid criminal misc. petition has been published on the website of this Court which discloses identity of the victim of the offence of rape and hence, suitable direction be issued to delete the order from the official website.
3. Learned Government Advocate cum Additional Advocate General agreed with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. Heard. Considered.
5. Relying on the provisions of Section 228-A IPC, Section 74 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 & Section 23 of the POCSO Act, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has, in case of Nipun Saxena & Anr. (supra), directed that identity of victim of an offence of rape or under the POCSO Act shall not be disclosed in any manner. Recently, a Division Bench of Hon'ble Bombay High Court has, in case of Sangita versus the State of Maharashtra & Ors.: 2021ALLMR(Cri)1131, issued following directions in addition to directions issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court of India in case of Nipun Saxena & Anr. (supra):-
"15. The Honourable Supreme Court has dealt with the aspect of disclosure of the identity of the victim while preferring appeal. However, there can be disclosure of identity of victim while recording evidence during trial, recording statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, framing charge, submitting remand report by the police. To avoid disclosure of identity of victim in the same, we propose, in addition to the directions of the Honourable Supreme Court in Nipun Saxena (supra), to issue the following directions to the print media, the electronic media, the people using social media such as WhatsApp, Facebook, Internet, Twitter etc.
The print media, the electronic media, the people using social media such as WhatsApp, Facebook, Internet, Twitter etc. while giving information/circulating information relating to offences under section 376, 376-A, 376-B, 376-C, 376-D or 376-E of the Indian Penal Code and the offences under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, shall not publish/disclose following information in such a manner that the victim will be identifed directly or indirectly :-
i) The names of the parents or relatives of the victim.
ii) Relation of the accused with the victim.
iii) Residential/occupational/work address of the accused and the victim and the village at which the victim and/ or accused live.
iv) Occupation of the parents or other relations of the victim and place of work of the victim and accused /their parents or any other relative in such a manner that the victim will be identifed.
v) If the victim is a student, name of the school or college or any other educational institution or private coaching class or classes which the victim has joined for pursuing her hobbies such as music, drawing, dance, stitching, cooking etc.
vi) Details of family background of the victim."
6. Indisputably, the cause title of the SB Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.5536/2021 as mentioned in the order of this Court dated 18.10.2021 discloses identity of the victim therein.
7. In these circumstances, the criminal miscellaneous application deserves to be allowed in following terms:-
1. The order dated 18.10.2021 passed
Nipun Saxena & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors.: (2019) 2 SCC 703
AI
Prohibition of Disclosure of Victim's Identity in Sexual Offense Cases
Victims of sexual offenses, especially minors, are entitled to confidentiality in legal proceedings, allowing appeals without disclosing identities.
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 that statutory provisions and directions issued by the Supreme Court provide adequate safeguards to protect the interests of victims of sexual offe....
The absence of evidence proving identity disclosure under Section 228-A(1) IPC leads to quashing of proceedings.
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 ....
(1) Court must always be alive to consider incident of sexual act from victim’s perspective – Victim is best judge of incident.(2) It is duty of Special Court under POCSO Act to see that name of vict....
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.