MS. X versus THE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS. on 20 January 2021

156

[2021] 1 S.C.R. 156

SUPREME COURT REPORTS

[2021] 1 S.C.R.

MS. X

A

v.

THE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1352 of 2019)

B

JANUARY 20, 2021

[ASHOK BHUSHAN, R. SUBHASH REDDY ANDM. R. SHAH, JJ.]

Crime Against Women:

CRape victim – Rehabilitation of – Writ petition u/Art. 32 – Bythe victim – Seeking rehabilitation – Alleging that many people rapedher for which criminal proceedings were initiated – She, with herthree children has no means of survival and is not able to giveeducation to her children – Her identity has been disclosed by mediaas a rape victim – The administration, media and society has beenDalleged to compel her to lead a life with no security, no job and noshelter – Held: The petitioner is a rape victim and hence deservestreatment as rape victim by all the authorities – There is a statutoryscheme already enforced in the State concerned framed u/s.357ACr.P.C. for grant of compensation and the petitioner has alreadyEbeen paid the compensation under the Scheme – The Authoritiesconcerned are directed to take measures to ensure free educationto the minor children of the petitioner till they attain the age of 14years and also to consider her case for allotment of housingaccommodation under any of Central or State Schemes – Police isdirected to review the police security provided to her from time toFtime – Legal Services Authority is directed to render legal servicesto her as may be deemed fit – Jharkhand Victim CompensationScheme, 2012 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.357A.

Penal Code, 1860:

Gs.228-A – Disclosure of identity of rape victim – Is an offence– All including media (print as well as electronic) have to follow thelaw.

H

Disposing of the petition, the Court

HELD : 1.1 There can be no denial that the petitioner is arape victim. Even if other criminal cases filed by the petitionerunder Section 376 IPC are not take into consideration, in CaseNo.162/2002 where allegation of rape was made on 08.06.2002,the accused has been convicted under Section 376(2)(g) IPC for10 years RI. The petitioner being a rape victim deservestreatment as rape victim by all the authorities. A rape victimsuffers not only a mental trauma but also discrimination from thesociety. [Paras 16 and 17][161-G-H; 162-A-B]

1.2 The petitioner has two sons and one daughter. Theeldest son, of the petitioner, as on date is major and two childrenof the petitioner are still minor. The Deputy Commissioner,Ranchi is directed to take measure to ensure that minor childrenof the petitioner are provided free education in any of theGovernment Institutions in District Ranchi where the petitioneris residing, till they attain the age of 14 years. [Parsa 19 and 27(1)][162-F-G; 165-D-E]

Nipun Saxena and Another vs. Union of India andOthers (2019) 2 SCC 703 : [2018] 14 SCR 755 – reliedon.

2. Section 228-A of the Penal Code which has been insertedby Amendment Act 43 of 1983 with effect from 25.12.1983 makesdisclosure of the identity of the victim an offence. The law withregard to Section 228A is well established, all including the media,both print and electronic have to follow the law. [Paras 21 and23][163-B-C; 164-E-F]

3.1 With regard to the payment of compensation to thepetitioner as a rape victim, along with additional documents thepetitioner has brought on record materials to indicate that thedecision was taken by the District Legal Services Authority,Ranchi to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- by letter dated06.03.2017. The grant of compensation has been consideredunder the Jharkhand Victim Compensation Scheme, 2012 asamended in 2016. [Para 24][164-F-G]

A

B

CD

E

F

G

H

A3.2 There is a statutory scheme already enforced in theState of Jharkhand framed under Section 357A of the Code ofCriminal Procedure Code, 1973, which provides procedure forgrant of compensation. The petitioner had already madeapplication to seek compensation under the above Scheme andpayment of compensation has already been made. [Para 25]B[164-H; 165-A]

4. There are various Central as well as State Schemes forproviding residential accommodation to persons living belowpoverty line and other deserving cases. The DeputyCommissioner, Ranchi may consider the case of the petitionerCfor allotment of any housing accommodation under Prime MinisterAwas Yojna or any other Scheme of the Centre or the State. [Para26][165-B-D]

5. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi and othercompetent authority shall review the Police security provided toDthe petitioner, from time to time and take such measures as deemfit and proper. [Para 27 (3)][165-F-G]

6. The District Legal Services Authority, Ranchi onrepresentation made by the petitioner shall render legal servicesto the petitioner as may be deemed fit to safeguard the interestEof the petitioner. [Para 27 (4)][165-G]

Case Law Reference

[2018] 14 SCR 755relied onpara 17

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (Civil) No.F1352 of 2019.

(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India)

Tapesh Kumar Singh, Aditya Pratap Singh, Ms. Bhaswati Singh,Advs. for the Respondents.

GPetitioner-in-person

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.

This writ petition has been filed by a rape victim invoking thejurisdiction of this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution.H

2. This Court entertained the writ petition and while issuing noticeon 29.11.2020 passed the following order:

“Issue notice.

Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh, learned standing counsel for theState of Jharkhand, accepts notice on behalf of respondent/State.

Let the respondent/State file an affidavit giving details ofall proceedings initiated by the petitioner or against her and thestatus of those proceedings.

We, however, observe that the respondent no.3/HomeSecretary shall also ensure that the concerned police authoritiesare instructed to ensure protection of the petitioner.

List after four weeks.”

3. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State ofJharkhand to which rejoinder has also been filed by the petitioner. Thepetitioner has also filed certain additional documents.

4. From the pleadings of the parties following facts emerged:

The petitioner claims to be a Scheduled Tribe in the State ofJharkhand. The petitioner was born on 24.12.1984. On 31.03.1998,petitioner was taken away by one Basant Yadav. Petitioner’s father,Rajender Badaik, lodged a complaint. Basant Yadav was apprehendedon 02.04.1998. Father of the petitioner and Police of the concerned PoliceStation got the marriage of the petitioner solemnised with BasantYadav. After one year of the marriage, one son was born, named ManishYadav. Petitioner filed a complaint as well as case for maintenanceagainst her husband, Basant Yadav.

5. The petitioner obtained divorce from Basant Yadav and thecustody of son was given to Basant Yadav. On 08.06.2002, petitionerwent to Dultonganj on asking of Basant Yadav to meet her son on whichdate she was raped by one Mohd. Ali and three other accused. CaseNo.162 of 2002 under Section 376/34 read with Section 3(xi) of theScheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989 was registered in which accused, Mohd. Ali was apprehended andput on trial.

6. The petitioner lodged an FIR against the DY. Inspector Generalof Police on 02.08.2005 under Section 376,376(2)(a)IPC and Section A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

A3(1)(xii) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention ofAtrocities) Act,1989 on which on 03.08.2005 Case No.304 of 2005 wasregistered.The petitioner also lodged an FIR against an Inspector Generalof Police on which Sessions Trial No.257/2006 was registered. Certainother criminal cases got registered by the petitioner against differentpersons,some of which were filed under Section 376 IPC. In the SessionsBTrial 11 of 2006, the accused Mohd Ali was convicted on 15.02.2014with 10 years RI.

7. In the FIR lodged against Dy. Inspector General of Police finalreport was submitted which was accepted by the Court on 06.08.2007insofar as FIR lodged against Inspector General of Police, SessionsCJudge acquitted the Inspector General of Police by judgment and orderdated 23.12.2017 against which criminal appeal has been filed in theHigh Court of Jharkhand. A criminal case was also lodged against thepetitioner.

8. The petitioner’s case in the writ petition is that she being theDrape victim, whose identity was disclosed by the media and after knowingthat the petitioner is a rape victim, no one is ready to give heraccommodation even on rent. The petitioner in the writ petition invokedjurisdiction of this Court in the matter of rehabilitation of the petitioner.The petitioner also prays for direction to the respondent to protect theEpetitioner and her children’s life. The petitioner after divorce from herfirst husband got married to one Rajesh Kujur with whom a son wasalso born. The petitioner has also lodged criminal case being No.56/2004 against her husband Rajesh Kujur which resulted in acquittal.

9. The petitioner has also filed a copy of the legal notice datedF09.08.2019 which was sent by the landlord of the petitioner asking thepetitioner to vacate the premises on the ground of non-payment ofrent. The petitioner sent a letter dated 05.12.2019 stating that the landlordhad sealed the house on 04.12.2019.

10. In the counter-affidavit by the State, the State has given aGtabular chart containing status of 7 criminal cases which were initiatedby the petitioner. In paragraph 7 one of the cases mentioned in the chartis the case filed against Mohd. Ali, Mohd. Ali was convicted on15.02.2014 under Section 376(2)(g) IPC and Section 3(1)(xii) of theScheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989. In other criminal cases either the accused were acquitted orH

trial is pending in some cases. In two FIRs lodged by the petitioner,in the year 2018 under Section 354 A(ii) as well as under Section 376,448 and 506 IPC respectively the investigation is said to be going on.

11. The petitioner has appeared in person. Shri Tapesh KumarSingh, learned counsel has appeared for the State of Jharkhand.

12. The petitioner submits that due to the petitioner being rapevictim she is not getting any help from family friends or society. She,with three children, has no means of survival and she is not able togive education to her children. The administration, media and societyhas compelled the petitioner to lead a life with no security, no joband no shelter in future.

13. Shri Tapesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the Statesubmits that the petitioner has lodged various FIRs alleging rape againstseveral persons. It is submitted that against the petitioner also an FIRwas lodged at Palamau Sadar PoliceCase No.194 of 2002 for thecommission of the offences under Section 25(1-b)a of Arms Act,on thebasis of a written report submitted by the Assistant Sub-Inspector ofPolice in which charge-sheet has also been filed. It is submitted thatsince 02.10.2019 an armed Lady Constable, namely, Suman Surin hasbeen deputed with the writ petitioner for her security.

14. It is further submitted that the State has taken care of makingsecurity arrangement of the petitioner and in pursuance of the orderdated 06.01.2020 another security personnel has been deputed withthe writ petitioner. Learned counsel, however, submits that thePolice authority may be permitted to review the security from time totime to take appropriate measures in that regard. Shri Singh furthersubmits that the petitioner is in a habit of making false allegations againstseveral persons and officers. A complaint has recently been submittedmaking allegations of offences under Section 376 IPC. It is submittedthat the petitioner has vacated the earlier accommodation of SubodhThakur.

15. We have heard the petitioner in person as well as learnedcounsel appearing for the State.

16. There can be no denial that the petitioner is a rape victim.Even if we do not take into consideration other criminal cases filed bythe petitioner under Section 376 IPC, in Case No.162/2002 where A

B

C

D

EF

G

H

Aallegation of rape was made on 08.06.2002 the accused, Mohd. Alihas been convicted under Section 376(2)(g) IPC for 10 years RI. Thepetitioner being a rape victim deserves treatment as rape victim by allthe authorities.

17. A rape victim suffers not only a mental trauma but alsoBdiscrimination from the society. We may refer to the judgment of thisCourt in Nipun Saxena and another vs. Union of India and others,(2019) 2 SCC 703, wherein following observations were made bythis Court:

“12. A victim of rape will face hostile discriminationCand social ostracisation in society. Such victim will find itdifficult to get a job, will find it difficult to get married and willalso find it difficult to get integrated in society like a normal humanbeing. ………”

18. The petitioner herself has brought on record few ordersDpassed in Writ Petition (Cr.)No.229 of 2014 (Padma @ ShushmaBadaik vs. The State of Jharkhand and others) filed by the petitionerbefore the High Court of Jharkhand where in the order dated 12/11.09.2015 statement on behalf of the Counsel for the State wasrecorded by the High Court that State is ready to provide free educationto the children of the writ petitioner. Following is the statement recordedEby the High court on 12/11.09.2015:

“Counsel for the State has submitted that State is readyto provide free education to the children of the writ petitioner.If she will give her consent, her children shall be admitted in theGovt. Boarding School at Gumla and the expenses shall be borneFby the Government.”

19. The petitioner has two sons and one daughter. Manish Yadavappears to have been born after one year of the marriage which tookplace in the year 1998, eldest son, thus, as on date is major, two childrenof the petitioner are still minor.G

20. On an inquiry by the Court as to which authority is to ensurethat the minor children of the petitioner are provided free education,learned counsel submitted that it is Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi whocan take the appropriate measures to ensure that the minor children ofthe petitioner are provided free education. Learned counsel for the H

State has submitted that education upto the age of 14 years in the Stateof Jharkhand is free which is provided by the State. We, thus, are of theview that Deputy Commissioner shall take appropriate steps to ensurethat minor children of the petitioner are provided free education in anyGovernment Institution at Ranchi.

21. The petitioner has also raised grievance regarding her identitywhich has been disclosed by the media. The petitioner has annexedcertain materials along with writ petition and the additional documents.Section 228-A of the Indian Penal Code which has been inserted inthe Indian Penal Code by Amendment Act 43 of 1983 with effect from25.12.1983 makes disclosure of the identity of the victim is an offence.Section 228-A is as follows:

“Section 228A. Disclosure of identity of the victim ofcertain offences etc.—(1)Whoever prints or publishes thename or any matter which may make known the identity of anyperson against whom an offence under section 376, section 376A,section 376B, section 376C or section 376D is alleged orfound to have been committed (hereafter in this sectionreferred to as the victim) shall be punished with imprisonmentof either description for a term which may extend to twoyears and shall also be liable to fine.

(2) Nothing in sub-section (1) extends to any printing orpublication of the name or any matter which may make knownthe identity of the victim if such printing or publication is—

(a) by or under the order in writing of the officer-in-chargeof the police station or the police officer making theinvestigation into such offence acting in good faith forthe purposes of such investigation; or (b)by, or with the authorisation in writing of, the victim;or

(c) where the victim is dead or minor or of unsound mind,by, or with the authorisation in writing of, the next of kin ofthe victim:

Provided that no such authorisation shall be given by thenext of kin to anybody other than the chairman or the secretary,by whatever name called, of any recognised welfare institution ororganisation.

A

BC

D

E

F

G

H

Explanation.—For the purposes of this sub- section,“recognised welfare institution or organisation” means asocial welfare institution or organisation recognised in this behalfby the Central or State Government.

A

(3) Whoever prints or publishes any matter in relation toBany proceeding before a court with respect to an offencereferred to in sub- section (1) without the previous permissionof such Court shall be punished with imprisonment of eitherdescription for a term which may extend to two years and shallalso be liable to fine.

CExplanation.—The printing or publication of the judgmentof any High Court or the Supreme Court does not amount toan offence within the meaning of this section.”

22. This Court in Nipun Saxena and another (supra) hasoccasion to consider Section 228-A wherein this Court in para 50.1 hasDissued following directions:

“50.1. No person can print or publish in print, electronic,social media, etc. the name of the victim or even in a remotemanner disclose any facts which can lead to the victim beingidentified and which should make her identity known to theEpublic at large.”23. The law with regard to Section 228A is well established,all including the media, both print and electronic have to follow thelaw.

24. With regard to the payment of compensation to theFpetitioner as a rape victim, along with additional documents thepetitioner has brought on record materials to indicate that the decisionwas taken by the District Legal Services Authority, Ranchi to paycompensation of Rs.1,00,000/- by letter dated 06.03.2017. The letter ofthe Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Ranchi has been broughton record by the petitioner herself. The grant of compensation hasGbeen considered under the Jharkhand Victim Compensation Scheme,2012 as amended in 2016.

25. There is a statutory scheme already enforced in the State ofJharkhand framed under Section 357A of the Code of CriminalProcedure Code, 1973, which provides procedure for grant ofH

compensation. The petitioner had already made application to seekcompensation under the above Scheme and payment of compensationhas already been made.

26. The next grievance which has been highlighted by thepetitioner is the petitioner’s inability to get any rented accommodationin Ranchi due to she being a rape victim. In the counter-affidavit filed bythe State, it is clear that the petitioner has lived at several/different places but due to the dispute with the landlord she has to leavethe premises. There are various Central as well as State Schemesfor providing residential accommodation to persons living below povertyline and other deserving cases, the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi mayconsider the case of the petitioner for allotment of any housingaccommodation under Prime Minister Awas Yojna or any other Schemeof the Centre or the State.

27. In view of the foregoing discussion, we dispose of this writpetition with the following directions:

(1) The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi is directed to takemeasure to ensure that minor children of the petitioner areprovided free education in any of the Government Institutionsin District Ranchiwhere the petitioner is residing tillthey attain the age of 14 years.

(2) The Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi may also considerthe case of the petitioner for providing house underPrime Minister Awas Yojna or any other Central or StateScheme in which petitioner could be providedaccommodation.

(3) The Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi and othercompetent authority shall review the Police security providedto the petitioner from time to time and take such measuresas deem fit and proper.

(4) The District Legal Services Authority, Ranchi onrepresentation made by the petitioner shall render legal servicesto the petitioner as may be deemed fit to safeguard the interest ofthe petitioner.

Petition disposed of.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H