Kerala High Court Stresses Judicial Caution, Asserts Inability to Prosecute Magistrate under Section 228-A IPC for Inadvertent Omission to Anonymize Rape Victim’s Details
Case: XXX v State of Kerala
Coram: Justice Devan Ramachandran
Case No.: WP(C) NO. 40709 OF 2023
Court Observation: “In the case at hand, it is indubitable that the learned Magistrate was acting in performance of judicial duties and the error committed by her, or her office, is that the order was not anonymised qua the petitioner. This Court cannot, therefore, find the request of the petitioner, for initiation of action against the learned Magistrate under Section 228 A of the IPC, to be worthy of grant, specifically within the ambit of the said Section, read with the provisions of the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985.“
“This Court, therefore, suggests that, in matters like this, wherever petitions are filed by or against victims of sexual offences-as specified under Section 228 A of the IPC – Judges and Judicial Officers must initiate immediate action to anonymise the details, particularly their names and addresses, before continuing with consideration of the applications/cases; and if this is done at the inception, obviously, the final orders will also carry such anonymisation. This should be done and ensured to be done.”
“The requirement of maintaining the secrecy with respect to the identity of the victim of a sexual offence being inviolable, there cannot be any doubt that the learned Magistrate ought to have been more careful, while issuing the order in question”
Previous Posts
Patna High Court Grants Appeal Beyond Stipulated Time, Citing CBIC Notification
Keywords
Kerala High Court Stresses Judicial Caution
