SC deprecates disclosure of identity of minor girl in rape case
New Delhi, Mar 28 (PTI): The Supreme Court has deprecated in "strongest terms" the disclosure of identity of a girl in a rape case and directed all high courts to ensure that names of survivors and their family members are not mentioned in court orders.
In its 2018 judgement in the Nipun Saxena case, the top court had said, "No person can print or publish in print, electronic, social media, etc. the name of the victim or even in a remote manner disclose any facts which can lead to the victim being identified and which should make her identity known to the public at large."
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N Kotiswar Singh attributed lapses in following the ruling to the general indifference of the courts and "possibly even" the lack of awareness of the deep stigma that follows such offences.
The top court said that the legislature in 1983 introduced a provision to the IPC seeking to protect the identity of the of the victim of the offence under Section 376 Indian Penal Code.
ALSO READ: Goa sex scandal in which councillor's son has been arrested has more than 100 victims: Cong leader
The amendment, it said, was made apparently to address a specific mischief that emerged starkly from the way sexual offence cases were handled: the public disclosure of a survivor's identity.
The bench thus directed that a copy of the judgment be sent to all the high court registrars general.
It also mentioned Section 228A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which prohibits the disclosure of the identity of victims of sexual offences, including rape, to prevent social stigma.
"This has been the long-standing position in law, but it has not been followed. The primary reason there amongst, one supposes, is the general indifference of the courts below and possibly even the lack of awareness of the deep stigma that follows such offences," the bench said.
The observations came while setting aside an order of the Himachal Pradesh High Court, which reversed the conviction of a man in the rape of a nine-year-old girl, saying courts must not give undue importance to minor discrepancies.
ALSO READ: Rupali Chakankar resigns as NCP state women's wing chief
The top court said that before 1983, there was no statutory bar on publishing the name or particulars of a female sexual assault victim, alleged or proven, and court reporting and media coverage could expose survivors to social stigma, ostracism, and lifelong reputational harm.
"Clearly, the intent of this section has been given a miss in these proceedings. The name of the victim is treated like that of any other witness and is freely used throughout the record. This must be deprecated in the strongest terms. In fact, this court has noticed earlier also that the mandate of this provision is not being followed," the bench said.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Defamation case: Application filed in court for voice sample of Rahul Gandhi
Sultanpur (UP) (PTI): An application for obtaining a voice sample of Rahul Gandhi was filed in an MP-MLA court here on Saturday during a hearing in a defamation case against the Congress leader over his alleged objectionable remarks against then BJP president Amit Shah in 2018.
The plaintiff Vijay Mishra's advocate, Santosh Kumar Pandey, said he filed the application requesting that a voice sample of Gandhi be collected and sent to a forensic science laboratory for comparison with a CD that has already been submitted to the court.
Rahul Gandhi's lawyers registered their objections to this demand. The next hearing in the matter is fixed for April 6, Pandey said.
On February 20, Gandhi, the Lok Sabha MP from Raebareli, had appeared before the court and recorded his statement, claiming the case was filed against him due to political vendetta.
He had also told the court that the audio and video evidence submitted by the complainant was incorrect and said he would present his own evidence.
In December 2023, the court issued a warrant against Gandhi after he failed to appear before it. He later surrendered before the court in February 2024 and was granted bail on two surety bonds of Rs 25,000 each.
The hearing was deferred on Friday due to a holiday on Ram Navami.
Pandey said that during the previous hearing, the complainant's side had filed an application seeking verification of audio and video evidence of the alleged statements made by Gandhi by matching them with his original voice.
The case stems from Gandhi's alleged objectionable remarks against Shah during the 2018 Karnataka election campaign. Following the remarks, Vijay Mishra, a resident of Hanumanganj under Kotwali Dehat police station area in Sultanpur, filed the defamation complaint.
