The Madras High Court has strongly warned the police department against disclosing the identity of victims in cases of sexual offences. Justice P. Velmurugan stated that if such violations are found, the Court would initiate suo motu contempt proceedings against the police department. The warning came during the hearing of a petition filed by an accused seeking a direction for the timely filing of the chargesheet.
The case involved a petition by Sakthivel Ganesan, the accused in Crime No.74 of 2025 registered on March 10, 2025, under Section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, along with Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act. The petitioner approached the Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, requesting that the police be directed to file the chargesheet within a fixed period.
The Government Advocate (Criminal Side), Dr. C. E. Pratap, representing the respondent police, submitted that the investigation had already been completed and that the chargesheet had been e-filed on May 12, 2025, before the Fifth Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai.
However, while examining the case records, Justice Velmurugan noted with concern that the name of the victim had been disclosed in the First Information Report (FIR). Highlighting the seriousness of this issue, the Court pointed out that the law prohibits the disclosure of the identity of rape victims. It also referred to the Supreme Court's directions which mandate that the identities of victims in rape and sexual offence cases must not be revealed in any form.
The law itself says that the identity of the victims of offence under Section 376 IPC should not be revealed. Further the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has clearly given directions that the identifications of the victims of rape and sexual offences should not be revealed in any form. But the Investigating Officers are not following either the law or the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Court observed.
Justice Velmurugan further directed the Director General of Police (DGP) and the Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai, to immediately issue clear and strict instructions to all investigating officers. These instructions must ensure that in cases involving certain sections—especially those related to sexual offences against women and children—the identity of the victim or child should never be revealed.
"If any deviation is found, the entire police department would be held responsible and the Court will take stringent action by way of initiating suo motu contempt," the Court warned.
The Court also directed the Inspector of Police of the concerned station to remove the victim’s name from the FIR and all related records or statements without delay.
With these directions in place, the Criminal Original Petition filed by Sakthivel Ganesan was disposed of. The Court made it clear that protecting the identity of victims is not only a legal requirement but a critical step in ensuring justice and dignity for survivors of sexual crimes.
The petitioner was represented by Advocate Mr. Rahul Jagannathan, while the Government Advocate, Dr. C. E. Pratap, appeared for the police department.
Counsel for Petitioner: Mr.Rahul Jagannathan
Counsel for Respondents: Dr. C. E. Pratap Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
Case Title: Sakthivel Ganesan v. Inspector of Police
Case No: Crl.O.P.No.17682 of 2025
