Starting A New Business? 7 Key Points To Keep In Mind.
The Bombay High Court put additional restraints on print and electronic media and barred them from publishing the identity of rape victims.
Upon taking into cognizance a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by the mother of a rape survivor from Ahmednagar, the Bombay High Court issued additional guildelines to ensure that the identity of rape or child abuse survivors is not disclosed in any way.
The petitioner had brought newspaper cuttings of a local newspaper before the Division Bench. The newspaper cutting not only revealed her name and detailed address but also full particulars of the accused.
She also brought a recent newspaper cutting of an offence committed by an assistant police officer who had been accused of raping his sister-in-law.In this case, the identity of the victim as well as the local and residential address of the accused were revealed in the newspaper.
After considering the PIL, a division bench headed by Justice TV Nalawade and MG Sewlikar issued additional restrictions upon the print and electronic media, restricting them from revealing the identity of rape or child abuse survivors.
The ruling even barred newspaper outlets and other forms of media from publishing details indirectly by revealing the names of parents, address, school or the survivor’s relationship with the accused if they are related.
The bench also stated that the survivors should be referred to as ‘X’ while recording statements or framing charges. It added, “The name, place of residence, occupation shall be kept in a sealed cover and in the name column, they can be referred in the same manner described while framing charge, keeping the address column, occupation column bank.”
In 2018, the Supreme Court had issued guidelines to protect the identity of rape victims. However, the restrictions were not only exempted on the media but also on social media posts, police and forensic authorities.
“Revealing the details of FIRs on rape in the public domain stays prohibited,” added the Supreme Court in its ruling.
The bench headed by Justice MB Lokur and Deepak Gupta who issued the guidelines in 2018 rightly observed the prejudice formed against rape victims.
They had said, “Unfortunately, in our society, the victim of a sexual offence, especially a victim of rape, is treated worse than the perpetrator of the crime…society, instead of empathising with the victim, starts treating her as an untouchable… and is ostracised from society.”
The bench added, “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…
Victims are subjected to harsh cross-examination during which a lot of questions are raised about her morals and character and the judges sometimes sit like mute spectators and normally do not prevent the defence from asking such defamatory and unnecessary questions.”
Hopefully, these guidelines as well as the new restrictions and guidelines issued by the Bombay High Court succeed in protecting the right to privacy of a rape survivor and protect the survivor from facing prejudice and mistreatment by society.
History, politics and pop culture enthusiast. read more...
Women's Web is an open platform that publishes a diversity of views, individual posts do not necessarily represent the platform's views and opinions at all times.
Stay updated with our Weekly Newsletter or Daily Summary - or both!
If a woman insists on her prospective groom earning enough to keep her comfortable, she is not being “lazy”. She is just being practical, just like men!
When an actress described women as “lazy” because they choose not to have careers and insist on only considering prospective grooms who earn a lot, many jumped to her defence.
Many men (and women) shared stories about how “choosy” women have now become.
One wrote in a now-deleted post that when they were looking for a bride for her brother, the eligible women all laid down impossible conditions – they wanted the groom to be not more than 3 years older than them, to earn at least 50k per month, and to agree to live in an independent flat.
Most of my women clients are caregivers—as mothers, wives and daughters. And so, they tend to feel guilty about their ambitions. Belief in themselves is hard to come by.
* All names mentioned in the article have been changed to respect client confidentiality.
“I don’t want to take a pay cut and accept the offer, but everyone around me is advising me to take up what comes my way,” Tanya* told me over the phone while I was returning home from the New Delhi World Book Fair. “Should I take it up?” She summed up her dilemma and paused.
I have been coaching Tanya for the past three months. She wants to change her industry, and we have been working together on a career transition roadmap.
Please enter your email address