#westbengal Archives - Prime Legal

Case title: Utpal Mandal @ Utpal Mondal vs The State of West Bengal & Anr.

Case no.: SLP (Criminal) Diary No(s).8058/2024

Decision on: April 4th, 2024

Quoram: Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale

Facts of the case

The issue in this case pertains to the disclosure of a victim’s identity in a POCSO case. A Special Leave Petition seeking an anticipatory bail was filed before the Supreme Court contesting an order passed by the Calcutta High Court.

Court’s Analysis

The Court observed that the mandatory requirements of Section 33(7) of the POCSO Act and Section 228A of the I.P.C., which prohibited the disclosure of a victim’s identity, were not followed while recording statements of the victim under Sections 164 and 161 of the CrPC. Further, it noted that the victim’s name was her name is mentioned and had not been masked as per law laid down in the landmark case of Nipun Saxena Vs Union of India. The Court emphasizing on the need for strict compliance with the legal provisions quoted relevant extracts from the said judgement.

The Supreme Court had stated that, “Neither IPC nor CrPC define the phrase “identity of any person”. Section 228-A IPC clearly prohibits the printing or publishing “the name or any matter which may make known the identity of the person”. It is obvious that not only the publication of the name of the victim is prohibited but also the disclosure of any other matter which may make known the identity of such victim. We are clearly of the view that the phrase “matter which may make known the identity of the person” does not solely mean that only the name of the victim should not be disclosed but it also means that the identity of the victim should not be discernible from any matter published in the media. The intention of the law-makers was that the victim of such offences should not be identifiable so that they do not face any hostile discrimination or harassment in the future.”

Legal Provisions

Section 33(7) of the POCSO Act – The Special Court shall ensure that the identity of the child is not disclosed at any time during the course of investigation or trial.

Section 228A of the IPC – This provision provides for up to two years imprisonment with or without fine for those who reveal the identity of victims of sexual abuse in public.

Section 161 of CrPC – This provision provides for the Oral Examination of witnesses by police.

Section 164 of CrPC – This provision authorizes the Magistrate to record the statement of a person or his confession.

Court’s Order

The Apex Court called upon the Judicial Officers and Police Officers of West Bengal to undertake an exercise of sensitization over the issue of masking the POCSO Victim’s names and ensure strict compliance of the mandatory requirement. It also directed a copy of this order to be forwarded to the Registrar General of the High Court of Calcutta for being placed before the Chief Justice.

In light of the mandatory requirements under Section 33(7) of the POCSO Act and Section 228A of the IPC, it underscored the paramount importance of safeguarding the identity of child victims. Through this order, the Bench aimed to aims to prevent further violations of the rights of child victims and suggested the authorities to sensitize over the identity of child victims in POCSO cases and upheld the principles of justice and protection.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Judgement Reviewed by – Keerthi K

Click here to view the judgement

Title: Shantibala Naskar Vs. State of West Bengal and others

Decided on: 4th october 2023

WPA No. 18598 of 2023

Coram: Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.

Introduction

In a case where the forest department of west bengal government refused to pay compensation to the family of a deceased, who had died due to injuries caused by a wild animal, the calcutta high court ordered that the faimly of the deceased were lible to the compensation.

Facts of the case

The petitioner in this case is the widow of a deceased person, residing in the Sundarbans area. The area is infested by tigers and other wild animals. After the demise of petitioner’s husband, the post mortem report obtained also indicated that the death was due to effects of injury caused by a big animal like tiger. As per the order of the Government of West Bengal, Department of Forests would pay a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- to the family of the deceased in such cases, subject to certification regarding cause of death from an appropriate authority. When the petitioner applied for compensation, the authorities refused the same on the ground that upon an inquiry it was found that no such tiger attack was recorded in the Range Offices of Sundarban Tiger Reserve.

Court Analysis and Decision

It was observed that according to the forest department authorities none of the Range Offices or forest camps recorded any such incident of tiger attack or death by a tiger attack. Since there is no such record before the relevant authorities for the relevant period, there is no question of granting compensation to the petitioner. There are core areas and buffer areas of the forests, which if the petitioner’s husband had entered into without the permission of the forest authorities, the department would not be liable to grant compensation to the petitioner for such illegal act of the deceased. The order of the department indicates that the revised payment of compensation pertains to the loss of life and property due to depredation by wild animals. An ex-gratia grant was sanctioned to be given to the victims or the legal heirs of the victims of depredation caused by wild animals. None of the orders or communications distinguishes between demise in the core areas or the buffer areas of the forest. Even if the petitioner’s husband is construed to have transgressed the law for earning his livelihood and stepped into the core area, the family of the poor victim in such cases will be deprived of compensation merely for transgression of law as perceived by the Forest authorities.

The only issue regarding grant of compensation is that the compensation has to be subject to certification regarding cause of death from appropriate authority. In the present case, the petitioner’s husband was admitted to Jaynagar Rural Hospital before his demise and a postmortem report was issued by the Superintendent of the Alipore Police Case Hospital. Both the authorities are government institutions and there is no occasion for the respondents to deny the veracity of the documents. since a post mortem report states the cause of death of her husband is a wild animal attack in the Sundarban area, the authorities are duty bound to pay compensation for such incident to the petitioner.

The court directed the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (Head of Forest Force), Government of West Bengal to grant the compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- to the petitioner within 10 days for the sad demise of her husband by tiger attack in the Sundarban area. It is made clear that such compensation shall be received by the petitioner on behalf of herself and her family, being all the heirs and legal representatives of the said deceased.

Written by- K R Bhuvanashri

click here to view judgement

Best Lawyers in Bangalore

Supreme Court directed the Judicial Officers and Police Officers of West Bengal to undertake an exercise of sensitization over the issue of masking the POCSO Victim’s Names

The Family of Deceased by the Attack of Wild Animal is Liable for Compensation even if Law is Transgressed