Notice issued on plea for action against media for revealing identity of rape victim in Hyderabad rape case

Kosha Doshi | Symbiosis Law School, Pune | 6th April 2020

Yashdeep Chahal v. Union of India [Delhi High Court]

Facts:

About 100 sexual assault reports are being reported at the police station daily. Every few weeks images of either a victim or an accused in relation to rape go viral. Recently, all social media platforms and networking sites have been viral with images of a brutal rape victim and its death. The four accused details were also circulated among the social sites. 

            A 26-year-old doctor was raped and killed in Shamshabad, Telangana by four men on the 27^th of November, 2019.  As per the Cyberabad, the four men had punctured the rear wheel of the victim’s scooter and offered to help. The four accused then yanked her to an isolated area near the toll plaza and raped her. The victim is believed to have suffocated to death after a brutal rape. With the death of humanity, they did not stop at raping her but burned her body. The accused were arrested and were sent for judicial custody. 

A petition was filed by Yashdeep Chahal advocated by Chirag Madaan and Sai Krishna Kumar.  On Wednesday, 4^th of December, 2019, the Delhi High Court sent a notice to the Centre, government of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh. The Delhi High Court sent a notice to certain media houses for their action of revealing identities of the victim and the four accused men in the Hyderabad rape case.  The Bench comprised of Chief Justice DN Patel and Hari Shankar in the case with respondents as Union of India, Delhi government, and Telangana government, Press Council of India, Facebook India, Twitter, OpIndia.com, News Broadcasting Standard Authority of India, News Indian Express and India Today. 

Judgment:

The petition was filed to curb the practice of disclosing personal details of victims and accused before completion of the investigation. As per Section 228A of Indian Penal Code laid down in the Nipun Saxena Case, exposing the names, addresses, pictures, work details, etc was disrespecting one’s right of privacy. Section 228A brings about punishment up to 2 years along with fine if details are disclosed. 

            In the Kathupa rape case, an 8-year-old was raped and murdered. The court imposed a fine of 10 lakh rupees on 12 media houses for revealing details. It further issued an apology in regard to disrespect to the privacy of the victim. The landmark case of Nipun Saxena set forth several guidelines in respect to the violation of Section 228A. Justice Madan B Lokur and Justice Deepak Gupta stated that even the dead have their own dignity. The fact that the victim is dead is immaterial. 

            Following the guidelines set forth in Nipun Saxena case regarding protection of identity, the Delhi High Court issues a notice. The guidelines set:

• No person to print or publish in print, electronic form, social media the name or disclose any facts revealing the identification of the victim or accused
• If the victim dies or is of unsound mind, the disclosure would not take place irrespective of the fact that it is authorized by the next kin. Unless proper justifying circumstances are provided to the Sessions Judge.
• FIRs under Section 376 of IPC and under the POSCO Act not to be published in public domain
• It is not necessary to disclose an appeal made by the victim under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1972
• Police officers are required to keep the documents in a sealed cover and replace the original documents with identical documents to avoid disclosure
• Authorities in front of whom the identity or facts are disclosed have a duty to keep them a secret
• Application by the next kin is authorized under Section 228 A (2)(c) of IPC in front of the Sessions Judge keeping in mind the social welfare 
• Identity of victims who are minors under the POSCO Act can be disclosed only if permitted by the Special Court and if it benefits the child.

The plea sought the following directions:

• Direct the respondent to initiate appropriate proceedings against the media house and individuals responsible as per law.
• Direct investigation authority to prevent supply of information and neither the public nor media to publish information prior to completion of investigation.
• Immediate enquiry against officers who failed to take cognizance against violation indulged supply of media. 

            Media being the fourth pillar of democracy needs to respect the right of privacy each individual holds irrespective of their death. Media passes a judgment by showcasing the victims and declaring the accused but it takes a lot more than just putting forth details. It is the duty of media houses to protect an individual who had gone through a brutal rape or is dead.