Prohibition On Publishing Rape Victim’s Identity & Photograph Can Apply To Whatsapp Groups Also: Jharkhand High Court

The Court was hearing an Criminal Revision challenging the order where the Court dismissed the Petitioner’s application under Section 227 of the CrPC and set the case for framing of charges. During the pendency of the revision, the trial Court framed charges against the Petitioner under Sections 228 (A), 120 B of the IPC, Section 74 (1) (3) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2012 and Section 23 of the POCSO Act, 2012. The Petitioner prayed to quash the charge framing order.

The bench of Justice Arun Kumar Rai observed, “...Whats App news group in the name of “Nala News” in which message regarding identity of victim and her photograph were sent, would come within the domain of “any form of media” & “audio-visual media”….prima facie case is made out under Section 228 A of IPC on account of fact that it is admitted case of petitioner, also that report/messages and photographs of the victim got forwarded to social media platform...”

Advocate Indrajit Sinha appeared for the Appellant and AC to Government P.C. Sinha appeared for the Respondent.

Brief Facts-

The victim (just 4 years of age) was allegedly ravished, for which FIR was registered under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act. The victim was admitted to the hospital for her treatment and on the next day, the Petitioner, an M.L.A. of the area along with his supporters visited the Hospital to show sympathy with the victim and her family and in between, allegedly photographs of the victim were taken by Petitioner and a report stating the incident and effort taken by the petitioner- being an M.L.A. for securing justice to the victim, sent to the media as well as got viral in social media. Hence, the FIR.

The Court mentioned the Supreme Court decision in State of Maharashtra v. Som Nath Thapa reported in (1996) 4 SCC 659 where according to the Court it was held that while framing of charge, the Court has to prima facie look into the material brought on record which would reasonably connect the accused with the crime and a charge can be framed against the accused for committing an offence, if prima facie the Court thinks that the accused has committed the said offence and the case against him exists.

The Court further mentioned the Supreme Court decision in Nipun Saxena v. Union of India reported in (2019) 2 SCC 703 where the Court has set out the guidelines with regard to non-disclosure of name, identity and particulars of the victims of rape or sexual offences. The Court quoted, “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.”

The Court said that the revisional Court has to examine the correctness, legality or propriety of an order tabled before it and the Court concerned while the framing of charges has prima facie to look into the ingredients of offence and facts along with the material brought on record.

The Court further said that the disclosure of 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, in any form i.e. print or publish in print, electronic, social media, etc., is strictly prohibited and is an offence.

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the instant Criminal Revision.