Identity of a rape victim cannot be disclosed : Supreme Court

IN THE CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITIONNO.1352 OF 2019 THE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN J This writ petition has been filed by a rape victim invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution This Court entertained the writ petition and while issuing notice on 29.11.2020 passed the following order “Issue notice. Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh learned standing counsel for the State of Jharkhand accepts notice on behalf of respondent State. Let the respondent State file an affidavit giving details of all proceedings initiated by the petitioner or against her and the status of those proceedings. We however observe that the respondent no.3 Home Secretary shall also ensure that the concerned police authorities are instructed to ensure protection of the petitioner. List after four weeks.” A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State of Jharkhand to which rejoinder has also been filed by the petitioner. The petitioner has also filed certain additional documents. From the pleadings of the parties following facts The petitioner claims to be a Scheduled Tribe in the State of Jharkhand. The petitioner was born on 24.12.1984. On 31.03.1998 petitioner was taken away by one Basant Yadav. Petitioner’s father Rajender Badaik lodged a complaint. Basant Yadav was apprehended on 02.04.1998. Father of the petitioner and Police of the concerned Police Station got the marriage of the petitioner solemnised with Basant Yadav. After one year of the marriage one son was born named Manish Yadav Petitioner filed a complaint as well as case for maintenance against her husband Basant Yadav The petitioner obtained divorce from Basant Yadav and the custody of son was given to Basant Yadav. On 08.06.2002 petitioner went to Dultonganj on asking of Basant Yadav to meet her son on which date she was raped by one Mohd. Ali and three other accused. Case No.1602 under Section 376 34 read with Section 3(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act 1989was registered in which accused Mohd. Ali was apprehended and put on trial The petitioner lodged an FIR against the DY Inspector General of Police on 02.08.2005 under Section 376 376(2)(a)IPC and Section 3(1)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes IPC and Section 3(1)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989. In other criminal cases either the accused were acquitted ortrial is pending in some cases. In two FIRs lodged by the petitioner in the year 2018 under Section 354 A(ii) as well as under Section 376 448 and 506 IPC respectively the investigation is said to be going on. 11. The petitioner has appeared in person. Shri Tapesh Kumar Singh learned counsel has appeared for the State of Jharkhand. 12. The petitioner submits that due to the petitioner being rape victim she is not getting any help from family friends or society. She with three children has no means of survival and she is not able to give education to her children. The administration media and society has compelled the petitioner to lead a life with no security no job and no shelter in future. 13. Shri Tapesh Kumar learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the petitioner has lodged various FIRs alleging rape against several persons. It is submitted that against the petitioner also an FIR was lodged at Palamau Sadar PoliceCase No.194 of 2002 for the commission of the offences under Section 25(1 b)a of Arms Act on the basis ofa written report submitted by the Assistant Sub Inspector of Police in which charge sheet has also been filed. It is submitted that since 02.10.2019 an armed Lady Constable namely Suman Surin has been deputed with the writ petitioner for her 14. It is further submitted that the State has taken care of making security arrangement of the petitioner and in pursuance of the order dated 06.01.2020 another security personnel has been deputed with the writ petitioner Learned counsel however submits that the Police authority may be permitted to review the security from time to time to take appropriate measures in that regard Shri Singh further submits that the petitioner is in a habit of making false allegations against several persons and officers. A complaint has recently been submitted making allegations of offences under Section 376 IPC. It is submitted that the petitioner has vacated the earlier accommodation of Subodh Thakur. 15. We have heard the petitioner in person as well as learned counsel appearing for the State 16. There can be no denial that the petitioner is a rape victim. Even if we do not take into consideration other criminal cases filed by the petitioner under Section 376 IPC in Case No.162 2002 where allegation of rape was made on 08.06.2002 the accused Mohd. Ali has been convicted under Section 376(2)(g) IPC for 10 years RI The petitioner being a rape victim deserves treatment as rape victim by all the authorities. 17. A rape victim suffers not only a mental trauma but also discrimination from the society. We may refer to the judgment of this Court in Nipun Saxena and another vs Union of India and others 2 SCC 703 wherein following observations were made by this Court “12. A victim of rape will face hostile discrimination and social ostracisation in society. Such victim will find it difficult to get a job will find it difficult to get married and will also find it difficult to get integrated in society like a normal human being. …” 18. The petitioner herself has brought on record few orders passed in Writ PetitionWhoever 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 376A section 376B section 376C or section 376D 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 2) Nothing in sub section 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 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 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 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 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.” 22. This Court in Nipun Saxena and anotherhas occasion to consider Section 228 A wherein this Court in para 50.1 has issued following directions: “50.1. 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.” 23. The law with regard to Section 228A is well established all including the media both print and electronic have to follow the law. 24. With regard to the payment of compensation to the petitioner as a rape victim along with additional documents the petitioner has brought on record materials to indicate that the decision was taken by the District Legal Services Authority Ranchi to pay compensation of Rs.1 00 000 by letter dated 06.03.2017. The letter of the Secretary District Legal Services Authority Ranchi has been brought on record by the petitioner herself. The grant of compensation has been considered under the Jharkhand Victim Compensation Scheme 2012 as amended in 25. There is a statutory scheme already enforced in the State of Jharkhand framed under Section 357A of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code 1973 which provides procedure for grant of compensation. The petitioner had already made application to seek compensation under the above Scheme and payment of compensation has already been 26. The next grievance which has been highlighted by the petitioner is the petitioner’s inability to get any rented accommodation in Ranchi due to she being a rape victim. In the counter affidavit filed by the State it is clear that the petitioner has lived at several different places but due to the dispute with the landlord she has to leave the premises. There are various Central as well as State Schemes for providing residential accommodation to persons living below poverty line and other deserving cases the Deputy Commissioner Ranchi may consider the case of the petitioner for allotment of any housing accommodation under Prime Minister Awas Yojna or any other Scheme of the Centre or the State. 27. In view of the foregoing discussion we dispose of this writ petition with the following directions 1) The Deputy Commissioner Ranchi is directed to take measure to ensure that minor children of the petitioner are provided free education in any of the Government Institutions in District Ranchi where the petitioner is residing till they attain the age of 14 years. 2) The Deputy Commissioner Ranchi may also consider the case of the petitioner for providing house under Prime Minister Awas Yojna or any other Central or State Scheme in which petitioner could be provided accommodation. 3) The Senior Superintendent of Police Ranchi and other competent authority shall review the Police security provided to the petitioner from time to time and take such measures as deem fit 4) The District Legal Services Authority Ranchi on representation made by the petitioner shall render legal services to the petitioner as may be deemed fit to safeguard the interest of the ( ASHOK BHUSHAN ( R. SUBHASH REDDY ( M.R. SHAH New Delhi January 20 2021

Summary: A rape victim suffers not only a mental trauma but also discrimination from the society. The Supreme Court bench consisting of J. Ashok Bhushan, J. R. Subhash Reddy and J. M. R. Shah, directed executive officials to provide housing and protection to a rape victim in the matter of Ms. X v. The State of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. [Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1352 of 2019]. The Petitioner, who claims to be a Scheduled Tribe, was taken away by  Basant Yadav, after which she was married to him by her father. One son was born out of marriage after which the Petitioner filed a complaint as well as case for maintenance against her husband. After obtaining divorce, the custody of the son was given to Basant Yadav. One day, the petitioner went to meet her son when she was raped by Mohd. Ali and three other accused. A case under Section 376/34 read with Section 3(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was registered in which the accused, Mohd. Ali was apprehended and put on trial. The petitioner lodged an FIR against the Inspector General of Police under Section 376, 376(2)(a) IPC after which the Inspector was acquitted against which a criminal appeal was further filed. Mohd. Ali was convicted and a criminal case was also lodged against the petitioner. The petitioner’s case was that she being a rape victim, whose identity was disclosed by the media, was not able to get any accommodation even on rent and so invoked the jurisdiction of this court in the matter of her rehabilitation. The landloard had asked her to vacate the premises owing to non-payment of rent. She stated that she had three children and no means of survival and the administration, media and society had now compelled her to lead a life with no security, no job and no shelter. The counsel for the State submitted that the petitioner has lodged various FIRs alleging rape against several persons and thus, was in the habit of making false allegations.