Check out 16 Return-To-Work Programs In India For Ambitious Women Like You!
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!
UP Boards Topper Prachi Nigam was trolled on social media for her facial hair; our obsession with appearance is harsh on young minds.
Prachi Nigam’s photo has been doing the rounds on social media for the right reasons. Well, scratch that- I wish the above statement were true. This 15-year-old girl should ideally be revelling in her spectacular achievement of scoring a whopping 98.05% and topping her tenth-grade boards. But oddly enough, along with her marks, it’s something else that garners more attention – her facial hair.
While the trolls are driving themselves giddy by mocking this girl who hasn’t even completed her school yet, the ones who are taking her side are going one step ahead – they are sharing her photoshopped pictures, sans the facial hair, looking nothing less than a celebrity with captions saying – “Prachi Nigam, ten years later”.
Doctors have already diagnosed her with PCOD in their comments, based on photographic evidence. While we have names for people shamed for their weight – body shaming, for their skin colour- racism, for their age- age shaming, for being a female- sexism, this category of shaming where one faces criticism for their appearance has no name. With that, it also has zero shame attached to it.
Please enter your email address