REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL/CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 565 OF 2012 NIPUN SAXENA & ANR. …PETITIONER(S)

Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. …RESPONDENT(S)

WITH W.P. (Crl.) No. 1 of 2013 W.P. (C) No. 22 of 2013 W.P. (C) No. 148 of 2013 SLP (CRL.).......CRLMP. No.16041/2014 W.P. (C) No. 568 of 2012

J U D G M E N T

Deepak Gupta, J.

Signature1 Not .Verified How and in what manner the identity of adult victims of Digitally signed by SANJAY KUMAR Date: 2019.03.28 Reason: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 1996¹ 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 v