HC takes serious note of disclosure of rape victim’s name in court judgment

The High Court has taken serious note of disclosure of the name of rape victim in the judgment of the Sessions Judge and has asked all the criminal courts in both the Union Territories to remain careful in future.
While dealing with acquittal appeal in a rape case, Justice Sanjay Dhar took strong exception to the judgment of the Sessions Judge wherein the name of the victim has been repeatedly mentioned. “It is well established that in the cases relating to sexual offences, the name of the victim is not to be mentioned in any proceeding”, the High Court said and directed all the criminal courts of Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh to remain careful. while dealing with such cases.
“The Registry shall circulate soft copies of this judgment to all the criminal courts of Union Territories of J&K and Ladakh”, the High Court directed.
The appellant-State has challenged the impugned judgment of acquittal dated 15.02.2021 passed by Principal Sessions Judge, Budgam, whereby the respondents have been acquitted of the charges for offenses under Section 363, 376, 342, and 109 RPC arising out of FIR No .230/2007 registered with Police Station, Budgam.
Justice Sanjay Dhar observed, “in the instant case, as already noted, there are contradictions on essential aspects of the case inter se the statements made by the prosecutor before the police during investigation and before the court during the trial”.
“There are also contradictions between her statement and the statement of the Medical Officer and there are contradictory versions about the involvement of both the accused in the alleged occurrence. Even the statement of the father of the prosecutor contradicts her version of occurrence. In these circumstances, it would be hazardous to base conviction of the respondents/accused on the solitary statement of the prosecutor or at least it can be said that there is a reasonable doubt with regard to alleged occurrence and involvement of respondents/accused therein”, High Court said.
“Thus, the conclusion derived by the trial court on the basis of the evidence on record is possible”, the High Court said, adding “there is no ground to interfere with the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court. The appeal lacks merit and is dismissed accordingly”.