ORDER

Dated this the 10^th day of September, 2024 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 CC.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 1^st accused, who is the printer and publisher of the Rashtra Deepika Publications, Kottayam and the 2^nd 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 submit that, there was allegation against the complainant and 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, 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 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