Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

OVERVIEW

OBSERVATION IN COURT

  • The Court highlighted the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in 2018, along with the provisions mentioned in the IPC and POCSO regarding disclosure of information in cases related to rape.
  • The Court held that print media, electronic media, people using social medial, while circulating information regarding offences under POCSO Act, and under 376, 376 (A), 376 (B), 376 (C), 376 (D), or 376 (E) of the IPC, shall not publish/disclose following information that threatens to reveal the identity of the victim directly/indirectly.
  • The media ought to restrain disclosure and publishing information related to the names of parents or relatives of the victim, relation of the accused with the victim, residential/occupational/work address of the accused and victim, and the village where the accused and/or victim reside in. The court, however, clarified that it does not mean that the media deliberately divulge the details.
  • The HC also directed that details related to occupations of the parents or relatives of the victim, along with their places of work, should be avoided so as to avoid revelation of the victim.
  • It was directed that if the victim is a student, the media should restrain from mentioning the name of the school or college, or any other educational institution or private coaching classes or classes which the victim has joined for pursuing her hobbies. It also stated that the media should avoid giving out details related to the family background of the victim.
  • The court also issued directives to trial courts and special POCSO courts and investigating officers.
  • Justice Sewlikar, additionally observed that the victim's name is disclosed during the framing of charge, or recording evidence and statement of the accused, under sec. 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Therefore, it was directed that mentioning the name of the victim should be avoided while framing charges. Instead, he/she ought to be referred to as ‘X' or any other alphabet the court deems appropriate.
  • While recording evidence, if the witness states the name of the victim, the court shall record that as ‘the witness stated the name of the victim but to conceal her identity, her name is not recorded.' Additionally, the witness's name, in case he/she is a victim, should also not be disclosed while recording evidence.
  • Advocate A.D. Ostwal, appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist the court, submitted that electronic media, containing interviews of the victim or his/her relatives, tend to disclose the identity of the victim by his/her voice even if the face is blurred. The bench directed the interviewers, as well as the general public using electronic media, to take precautions to prevent disclosure of the identity of the victim. 

CONCLUSION 

  • Disposing of the PIL, the court directed its registry to forward its guidelines to the Principal Secretaries of state Home, Law and Judiciary departments, along with secretaires of Indian Broadcasting Foundation and the Press Council of India.

Click here to download the original copy of the judgment

"Loved reading this piece by Nikita Mehrotra?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"




Tags :

  Views  91  Report



Comments
img