Bombay High Court: In a case where the law firm representing a rape victim had disclosed her name in the petition, the Division Bench of Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj K. Chavan, JJ., came down heavily on the firm and directed it to deposit costs of Rs. 5,000.

The counsel for the petitioner had sought leave to amend to mask the name of the prosecutrix wherever it appears in the petition, including in the cause title of the petition. The Court while granting the leave directed that the amendment be carried out during the course of the day. The Court noted,

“Despite Section 228-A of the Penal Code and despite repeatedly telling the Advocates that it is an offence to disclose the name of the prosecutrix which is punishable with two years, the name of the prosecutrix is disclosed in the aforesaid petition.”

Hence, the Court directed Hulyalkar & Associates, the law firm that drafted the petition, to deposit costs of Rs. 5,000 with the Kirtikar Law Library within two weeks. The Court further directed the law firm to issue a notice to the respondent and submit a spare copy to the Registry of the Court on the amendment being carried out.

[x v. y, 2022 SCC OnLine Bom 7506, decided on 22-12-2022]

Advocates who appeared in this case :

For the Petitioner: Advocate Zaid Anwar Qureshi i/b Hulyalkar & Associates;

For the State of Maharashtra: J.P. Yagnik, A.P.P.

*Kamini Sharma, Editorial Assistant has put this report together.

Must Watch

maintenance to second wife

bail in false pretext of marriage

right to procreate of convict

Criminology, Penology and Victimology book release

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.