Dileep case: Kerala High Court refuses to quash case against newspaper for revealing victim's identity

The Kerala High Court recently refused to quash criminal proceedings against the printer and publisher, and former Chief Editor of Rashtra Deepika Publications, Kottayam, for disclosing details of the survivor in the 2017 actress assault case. [Fr Joseph Kuzhinjalil & Anr v. State of Kerala].Justice A Badharudeen noted that even though the name of the survivor-actress was not mentioned in the publication's Malayalam newspaper, details revealed in the report were more than sufficient to identify her. The Court said that the proceedings cannot be quashed because the ingredients to attract the offence under Section 228A (disclosure of identity of victim of certain offences including rape) of the Indian Penal Code were prima facie made out in this case. "On reading the publication effected, which led to registration of this crime, as extracted hereinabove, it could be gathered that necessary inputs to disclose the identity of the victim in Crime No.297/2017 [actress assault case], alleging commission of offence under Section 376 [rape] of the IPC, were published," the Court said in its order. .In 2017, the survivor-actress was allegedly abducted and sexually assaulted in a moving vehicle by several persons. This was allegedly carried out at the behest of Malayalam cine actor Dileep.The trial in the case underway before the Ernakulam District and Sessions Court..The petitioners in the present case, Fr. Joseph Kuzhinjalil and Fr. Boby Alex, who are the printer and publisher and former Chief Editor respectively, were accused of disclosing the identity of the actress in the December 20, 2017 edition of the Rashtra Deepika Evening Daily.They moved the High Court to quash the proceedings against them, arguing that the publication had not disclosed anything that could either directly or indirectly identify the actress. Opposing the petition, the Additional Director General of Prosecution (ADGP) submitted that even though the name of the survivor is not specifically mentioned, the report read in its entirety reveals her identity. .After going through the report, the High Court concurred with the ADGP."Going by the relevant portion of the publication, though the same, in no way, disclosed the name of the victim to the reader of the news, but necessary inputs to identify the victim...would give indication to the identity of the victim," the Court noted. It also observed that the ingredients to attract the offence under Section 228A(1) of the IPC include not just printing or publishing the name, but also printing or publishing "any matter which may make known the identity" of the survivor/victim."In fact, the Chief Editor or the Editor and printer and publisher, are persons in the ordinary course responsible for selecting the news items, are alleged to have committed the offence," the Court noted.Therefore, the Court refused to quash the proceedings against the petitioners..The petitioners were represented by Advocates Jomy George, R Padmaraj, Deepak Mohan, Chitra N Das, Rishab S and Rona Ann Siby.ADGP Grashious Kuriakose appeared for the State.