In a shocking development which shakes human conscience and compels one to lose faith in humanity itself, the name of the victim of the gruesome Hyderabad rape and murder victim has trended on a porn site. The disgusting incident brings to light the issue of perverted and lascivious minds which roam free in the society. This utterly shameful and disgusting development has taken in spite of Section 228A of the Indian Penal Code, which expressly bars and punishes making known the identity of a rape victim through printing or publication.
The name of the rape victim trending on a porn site is extremely unconscionable. It also brings to light the issue of flagrant violation of Section 228A of the IPC.
Even before the lascivious and disgusting minds trended her name on a porn site, the victim’s name went trending on Twitter and her identity was also revealed by several mainstream media outlets. Not only her name, even her pictures, including burnt pictures, were published by several mainstream media outlets.
It is simply shocking that while Section 228A strictly bars even the act of revealing the identity of a rape victim, leading dailies and media outlets having wide circulation across the country have revealed her name and her identity, literally making it known to crores of people across the country. Thus, flagrantly violating the provision with sheer impunity. Now, even a plea has been filed before the Delhi High Court emphasising how the media houses and individuals have violated the law. The petition has also alleged inaction on the part of state police authorities and their cyber cells to curb the constant revelation of the victim’s identity and the accused persons.
This is not the first time that mainstream media outlets have come under the scanner over revelation of a rape victim’s name. Even after the Kathua rape and murder case, several leading media outlets and print outlets like NDTV, Republic, The Times of India, The Week and The Hindu had faced vehement criticism and condemnation. They were also fined to the tune of Rs. 10 lakhs each, and the outlets had also tendered an apology before the Delhi High Court for disrespecting the victim’s privacy. However, the mainstream media houses seem to have once again failed in discharging their duties as they have been responsible for making the victim’s identity known.
The media outlets seem to have no respect for Supreme Court guidelines, according to which no media house or person is permitted to print or publish the name of the victim, or even in a remote manner disclose any fact which can lead to the identification of the Hyderabad victim and making her identity known to the public at large.
However, the media houses do not seem to care about the apex court guidelines, and have been contemptuously disregarding these directives. Imposition of fines to the tune of Rs. 10 lakh don’t seem to be enough of a deterrent, and if the provisions of Section 228A and the Supreme Court guidelines have to be implemented in letter and spirit then the authorities and the Courts must consider increasing the quantum of fines.
The media outlets look to earn big by augmenting TRPs and viewership. If they have to be deterred, then they must be restrained through imposition of heavier fines that actually hurt these outlets. After all, it is the mainstream media outlets and leading dailies, whose irresponsible behaviour of revealing victims’ names actually leads to the revelation of a victim’s name and identity. If the flow of information is plugged at this stage, then the object of Section 228A of the IPC would be served.
The manner in which the name and identity of the Hyderabad rape victim went public also suggests recklessness on the part of the state police forces across the country. It must be kept in mind that the Supreme Court guidelines also require the police not to put out the FIR of the case in the public and create a separate set of identical documents, wherein the identity of the victim is not revealed. The original report is supposed to be sent to the investigating agency or the Court in a sealed cover thereby preventing the name of the victim from getting revealed. However, with repeated instances of the name of rape victims getting revealed, there are serious questions regarding the police’s role in maintaining the secrecy of victim’s name.
The Hyderabad rape and victim case serves as an example of how recklessness and negligence in giving effect to the provisions of Section 228A of the IPC and Supreme Court guidelines can have a detrimental effect as far as protecting the honour and dignity of the women of the country is concerned.
