Supreme Court bars Media from revealing identity of sexual assault victims

Reiterating the provisions in the Indian Penal Code and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the Supreme Court today restrained the media from revealing the names and identities of victims of sexual assault, in any manner..While delivering the judgment in an application relating to the protection of identity of survivors, the Court said that the media cannot disclose the identity of the victims to the public in any manner. It was made clear that the restriction would apply to all kinds of media including press, electronic and social media..The verdict was passed in an application filed in Nipun Saxena v. Union of India, the main matter. On the last date of hearing, the Court had reserved its judgment on the question of interpretation of Section 23 of the POCSO Act and Section 228A of the IPC – both of which prohibit the publication of names of victims – and Section 3 of the Contempt of Courts Act..In the judgment delivered by Justices Madan B Lokur and Justice Deepak Gupta, the Court observed that victims of sexual offences are treated as “untouchables” and are often ostracised. On this aspect of social ostracism, the Court noted,.“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…..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.“.Noting that the media not only has the right but also the duty to report on crime, the Court said that the same should be done in a sensitive manner without sensationalizing such cases. Talking to the victims by media persons should be refrained from, the judgment said..“Reportage of such cases should be done sensitively keeping the best interest of the victims, both adult and children, in mind. Sensationalising such cases may garner Television Rating Points (TRPs) but does no credit to the credibility of the media.“.Additionally, the Court has also barred the uploading of FIRs filed in rape cases and cases under POCSO Act on websites, in order to protect the identity of the victims. Any reports from FSL laboratories or those to be submitted to the Court must be submitted in sealed covers..“We are not oblivious to the fact that in the first information report (for short ‘FIR’) the name of the victim will have to be disclosed. However, this should not be made public and especially not to the media….We make it clear that the copy of an FIR relating to the offence of rape against a women or offences against children falling within the purview of POCSO shall not be put in the public domain to prevent the name and identity of the victim from being disclosed….The Sessions Judge/Magistrate/Special Court can for reasons to be recorded in writing and keeping in view the interest of the victim permit the copy of the FIR to be given to some person(s)…We make it clear that the authorities to which the name is disclosed when such samples are sent, are also duty bound to keep the name and identity of the victim secret and not disclose it in any manner except in the report which should only be sent in a sealed cover to the investigating agency or the court.“.In addition to the name of the victim, even remote details that can result in disclosing the identity of the victim must be protected, and should not be put in the public domain, the Court further held..Moreover, the Court also noted that if a victim of sexual violence wants to move the Court, she may also do so under a pseudonym, provided that the adopted name does not harm any other person. This pseudonym will reflect in all public records of the case, including the causelist. The victim’s real name may only be entered in certain documents such as the vakalatnama, or for Court verification purposes..“The Court can verify the details but in the material which is placed in the public domain the name of the victim shall not be disclosed. Such an application should be heard by the Court in Chambers and the name should not be reflected even in the cause-list till such matter is decided. Any documents disclosing the name and identity of the victim should not be in the public domain.“.However, if an adult victim wishes to disclose her name, that same is allowed upon her authorising the same in writing..“… if an adult victim has no objection to her name being published or identity being disclosed, she can obviously authorize any person in writing to disclose her name. This has to be a voluntary and conscious act of the victim.“.The Court also ordered that identity of rape victims, who have died or who are unsound of mind, should not be disclosed even if the parents of the victim consent to the same..This is to guard against even a remote possibility of the victim’s next of kin divulging the victim’s identity for extraneous reasons, including financial gains. Dismissing arguments that the name of the rape victim may serve as a rallying point in the movement against sexual violence, the Court opined,.“If a campaign has to be started to protect the rights of the victim and mobilise public opinion it can be done so without disclosing her identity.“.If at all circumstances warrant the disclosure of the victim’s photo or name or identity, such as in cases where the victim is yet to be identified, an application has to be made to the Sessions Judge/Magistrate. The Bench exercised its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to issue this direction, given that the Government has not established any welfare centres which could perform the role of screening such applications..Before parting with the case, the Court also noted that there is still progress to be made when it comes to setting up child-friendly courts and courts in which rape cases against women could be tried. The current court atmosphere is often intimidating for victims of sexual violence, the Bench noted..As a way of ameliorating this situation to some extent, the Court has called for one-stop centres to be set up in each district to deal with the rehabilitation of victims of sexual assault. These centres would have to be equipped with appropriately trained and sensitised staff, psychologists and counsellors, video conferencing facilities etc..These one stop centres can be used as a central police station where all crimes against women and children in the town or city are registered, the Bench observed. The Court has requested all States and Union Territories to set up at least one ‘one stop centre’ in every district within a year’s time..Read the Judgment: