Delhi High Court Issues Practice Directions To Ensure Confidentiality Of Sexual Offences Victims In Filings

The Delhi High Court has issued practice directions to ensure that anonymity and confidentiality of the prosecutrix or victim of sexual offences is strictly maintained in all filings.

This comes pursuant to a judgment delivered by Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani in April in the case titled Saleem v. The State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

In the verdict, Justice Bhambhani held that there is no requirement in law to implead the victim of sexual offences as a party to any criminal proceedings instituted by the State or the accused. 

The court had directed its Registry to carefully scrutinise all filings relating to sexual offences and ensure that the anonymity and confidentiality of the prosecutrix or victim is strictly maintained.

The practice directions states that the Registry must ensure that the particulars of victims like name, address, photographs etc. do not get reflected in the cause-list of the court in any manner.

“The name, parentage and address of family members of the prosecutrix/victim/survivor — through whom the prosecutrix/victim/survivor could be identified — must not be disclosed in the filings, including in the memo of parties, even if they are accused in the case, since this may indirectly lead to the identification of the prosecutrix/victim/ survivor,” the directions state.

It adds that at the stage of scrutiny of the filings, if the Registry finds that the identity credentials of a victim are disclosed in the memo of parties or anywhere else in the filings, such filings must be returned to the filing counsel to undertake requisite redactions.

“If the parties wish to cite in court any identifying particulars of the prosecutrix/victim/survivor, including photographs or social media communications etc., such party may bring the same to court in ‘sealed cover’; or file the same in ‘sealed cover’ or in a ‘pass-code locked’ electronic folder and share the pass-code only with the concerned Court Master,” the directions add.

It has been added that the directions are not intended to be exhaustive that the Registry is expected, at the stage of scrutiny, to apply its mind to any peculiarities of a given case with the aim of scrupulously applying the Supreme Court’s directions in Nipun Saxena v. Union of India.

Click Here To Read Practice Directions