A petition was filed on Tuesday in the Delhi High Court alleging violation of law by media houses and individuals by revealing the identity and other details of the woman who was raped and killed by four men in Hyderabad.
The petition is listed for hearing on Wednesday before a bench comprising Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice C Hari Shankar.
The petition filed by Delhi-based lawyer Yashdeep Chahal said the plea aims to curb the practice of exposure of identity of rape victims in violation of IPC sections and various Supreme Court precedents.
He said there is blatant violation of Section 228A of the Indian Penal Code by individuals and media houses by publishing elaborate reports revealing the identity of the victim and the four accused in Hyderabad rape case on various online and offline portals.
Section 228A of the IPC makes disclosure of identity of victim of certain offences, including rape, punishable with imprisonment of a term which may extend to two years and fine.
The petition, filed through advocates Chirag Madaan and Sai Krishna Kumar, also alleged that there was inaction of the state police authorities and their cyber cells to curb the constant revelation of identity of the victim and the accused persons.
The petition comes in the wake of the rape and murder of the 26-year-old veterinary doctor who was killed in Shamshabad by four men on November 27.
In the Kathua rape case too, where an 8-year-old was brutally raped and murdered, 12 media houses were fined a penalty of Rs 10 lakh by the Delhi High Court for revealing the identity of the victim. This included NDTV, The Republic and print publications like The Times of India, The Week and The Hindu, which issued an apology before the HC for disrespecting the privacy of the victim.
Section 228A of the IPC makes disclosure of identity of victim of certain offences, including rape, punishable with imprisonment of a term which may extend to two years and fine.
According to SC guidelines, no media house or person is permitted to print or publish the name of the victim or even in a remote manner disclose any facts which can lead to the victim being identified and make her identity known to the public at large. Even at the authorisation of her/his kin, identity cannot be revealed until there are circumstances justifying the disclosure.
The guidelines also instruct the police to not put out the FIR of the case in the public name and create a separate set of identical documents where the identity of the victim is not revealed. The original report should only be sent in a sealed cover to the investigating agency or the court.
In the Hyderabad vet's case, the police had not confirmed till a few hours after the body was discovered, that it was a case of gangrape. Though the media houses can claim that they carried the name and picture before this disclosure, the fact remains that many continued to use her identity even after the gangrape was established.
Also, the Hyderabad cops in the case had put out the FIR of the case in the public domain, revealing the minute details and identity of the victim, for media and public scrutiny.
(With inputs from PTI)