Madras HC Imposes Rs 25,000 Cost on Accused for Revealing POCSO Victim’s Identity
Madras HC imposes a monetary cost on accused persons who violated the confidentiality provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, sending a strong message on safeguarding the dignity and privacy of child victims. The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court recently directed six accused individuals to pay Rs 25,000 as cost for revealing the identity of a minor victim in a petition filed before the court.
The order was passed while dismissing a petition seeking to quash the chargesheet filed against the accused. The court made it clear that disclosure of a victim’s identity, even within court documents, is a serious violation of law and cannot be treated lightly.
Justice L Victoria Gowri directed the accused to pay the amount directly to the victim through a demand draft by February 12. The court also issued directions to ensure that the victim’s identity is removed from all official records related to the case.
Madras HC Imposes Accountability on Legal Conduct
The court observed that the petitioners, including the victim’s father and other relatives, had mentioned the name of the minor victim in their quash petition. This, the judge noted, was a direct violation of the mandatory confidentiality provisions under the POCSO Act, 2012.
The POCSO Act clearly states that the identity of a child victim must not be disclosed by courts, police, lawyers or the media. This protection includes the victim’s name, address, photograph, family details and any other information that could lead to identification.
Justice Gowri strongly condemned the conduct of the petitioners as well as the manner in which the petition was drafted. The court stressed that legal proceedings cannot become a platform for exposing victims, especially minors who are entitled to the highest level of protection under law.
The judge also directed the Registry of the High Court to delete the victim’s name from the case records and replace it with the notation “XXXX” to prevent further disclosure.
Madras HC Imposes Cost While Refusing to Quash Chargesheet
While examining the plea to quash the chargesheet, the court found no merit in the arguments raised by the accused. Justice Gowri stated that a careful reading of the final report indicated clear allegations of sexual assault against the minor victim.
Given the seriousness of the allegations, the court refused to interfere with the ongoing trial. The judge held that the case involved grave offences under the Indian Penal Code and multiple sections of the POCSO Act, and such matters must be tested through proper trial proceedings rather than being dismissed at the preliminary stage.
The accused had claimed that they were falsely implicated in the case. However, the court noted that such claims could only be examined during trial and not in a quash petition, particularly when the chargesheet disclosed prima facie material supporting the allegations.
The petition was accordingly dismissed, and the matter was posted for further proceedings before the special POCSO court in Madurai on February 12.
View this post on Instagram
The accused were booked in 2024 for abetment and commission of sexual assault. The final report included charges under Sections 294(b) and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, along with multiple sections of the POCSO Act, including provisions relating to sexual assault, harassment and abetment.
The court emphasised that revealing the identity of a victim not only violates statutory provisions but also causes further trauma to the survivor. Such actions, the judge observed, defeat the very purpose of protective legislation like the POCSO Act. Also Read: Tribal Dept to Team Up With Global Chess Body to Reshape Learning in Schools in 2026
By imposing a monetary cost payable directly to the victim, the court underscored that violations of victim privacy will attract consequences, regardless of who commits them.
Conclusion
The order reiterates that the Madras HC imposes zero tolerance towards breaches of victim confidentiality under the POCSO Act. By holding the accused accountable and refusing to dilute serious charges, the court reinforced the principle that protecting child victims remains central to the justice system.
