Legal provisions regarding Disclosure of Identity of Victims of Certain Offences under section 228A of Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Disclosure of Identity of Victims of Certain Offences:
“(1) Whoever prints or publishes the name or any matter which may make known the identity of any person against whom an offence under Section 376, Section 376-A, Section 376-B, Section 376-C, or Section 376-D is alleged or found to have been committed (hereafter in this Section referred to as the victim) shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years and shall also be liable to fine.
Image Source: yag-u.com
ADVERTISEMENTS:
(2) Nothing in sub-sec. (1) extends to any printing or publication of the name or any matter which may make known the identity of the victim if such printing or publication is,—
(a) By or under the order in writing of the officer-in-charge of the police station or the police officer making the investigation into such offence acting in good faith for the purposes of such investigation; or
(b) By, or with the authorisation in writing of, the victim; or
ADVERTISEMENTS:
(c) Where the victim is dead or minor or of unsound mind, by, or with the authorisation in writing of, the next of kin of the victim:
Provided that no such authorisation shall be given by the next of kin to anybody other than the chairman or the secretary, by whatever name called, of any recognised welfare institution or organisation.
Explanation:-
For the purposes of this sub-section “recognised welfare institution or organisation” means a social welfare institution or organisation recognised in this behalf by the Central or State Government.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
(3) Whoever prints or publishes any matter in relation to any proceeding before a Court with respect to an offence referred to in sub-section (1) without the previous permission of such Court shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years and shall also be liable to fine.
Explanation:-
The printing or publication of the judgment of any High Court or the Supreme Court does not amount to an offence within the meaning of this Section.”
Section 228A has been introduced by the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1983 to prevent social victimisation or ostracism of the victim of a sexual offence.
Section 228 protects the victim from embarrassment due to the glare or damaging publicity and as such prohibits printing or publishing the name or any matter which may make known the identity of any person against whom an offence under the newly amended or added provisions, viz., S. 376 (punishment for rape) S. 376-A (intercourse by a man with his wife during separation), S. 376-B (intercourse by public servant with a woman in his custody), S. 376-C (intercourse by superintendent of jail remand home, etc) and S. 376-D (intercourse by any member of the management or staff of a hospital with any woman in that hospital) is alleged or found to have been committed.
There will be no ban on publication if the victim consents to disclose her identity or other facts which might disclose her name and identity.
The printing or publication of the proceeding before a court with reference to an offence referred to in sub-section (1) of Section 228- A, with the previous permission of such court or the printing or publication of the judgment of any High Court or the Supreme Court is also exempt from the operation of the provisions of Section 228-A.
The provisions of Section 228-A will not be applicable to any printing or publication of the name or any matter which may make known the identity of the victim if such printing or publication is under the order in writing of the officer-in-charge of the police station making the investigation into such offence acting in good faith for the purpose of such investigation, or where the victim is dead or minor or of unsound mind, with the authorisation in writing of the next of kin of the victim.
In R. Lakshmipahri v. Ramalingam [1998 CrLJ 3683 (Mad)], a complaint was filed against the accused (petitioners) for the alleged disclosure of identity of the victim of a rape in their newspaper. The reply notice showed that the publication was made at the instance of a recognised welfare association. It was held that the petitioners were exempt from prosecution under Section 228-A.
In Îm Prakash v. State of UP [2006 CrLJ 2913 (SC)], it was held that keeping in view that social object of preventing social victimisation or ostracism of victim of sexual offence for which Section 228-A has been enacted, it would be appropriate that in judgments, whether it be of Supreme Court, High Court or lower court name of victim should not be disclosed.
In State of Karnataka v. Puttaraja [2004 CrLJ 579 (SC)], it was held that it would be appropriate that in the judgment, be it of Supreme Court, High Court or lower court, the name of the victim should not be indicated.
The offence under Section 228-A is cognizable, bailable but summons ordinarily issue. It is not compoundable and triable by any Magistrate.
