Supreme Court Quashes Proceedings Against Journalist for Disclosing Minor Victim's Identity

Appellant's Explanation and Undertaking Lead to Quashing of Case Under POCSO Act

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has quashed the proceedings against Suraj V Sukumar, a journalist, who was accused of indirectly disclosing the identity of a minor victim under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, considered the appellant's explanation and the circumstances surrounding the case, leading to a conditional quashing of the proceedings.

The case originated when the appellant reported an incident involving allegations of sexual exploitation against a minor's mother, which were later found to be false. The report was uploaded on the appellant's YouTube channel, inadvertently revealing the victim's identity through images of the father and relatives. This was deemed a violation under Sections 23 and 23(4) of the POCSO Act.

The appellant's plea to quash the proceedings was initially rejected by the High Court. However, the Supreme Court, acknowledging the appellant's assertion that the indirect disclosure did not harm the reputation of the child or the mother, decided to quash the case. This decision was contingent upon the appellant furnishing an unconditional undertaking to avoid any future lapses and adhere strictly to the POCSO Act and other penal laws.

The court emphasized that the disclosure of a minor victim's identity is a grave offense. Nonetheless, it granted the appellant an opportunity for reformation, allowing for a conditional quashing of the proceedings. The appellant is required to submit an undertaking to both the Cyber Crime Police Station in Thiruvananthapuram Rural and the jurisdictional Sessions Judge within a week. Failure to comply or any future violations will lead to the automatic revival of the proceedings and cancellation of bail.

This ruling underscores the judiciary's commitment to protecting the identity of minor victims while balancing the scope for reformative justice. The decision sets a precedent for handling similar cases, emphasizing adherence to legal provisions while considering the context and intentions behind actions.

Statutory provision(s): Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Sections 23, 23(4)

Suraj V Sukumar @ Suraj Palakaran v. State of Kerala, (SC) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2819752