While directing the redaction of the prosecutrix’s name in a criminal matter, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ordered that in cases under Section 376 IPC or POCSO related offences, the Police, FSL and Doctors examining the prosecutrix are to be made aware that the name of the prosecutrix is not to be given and her parentage be shown only without prosecutrix’s address.

The High Court was informed by the Counsel appearing for the Union Territory that there were certain pages in which the name of the prosecutrix was revealed which is against the established law.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Puneet Gupta and Justice Atul Sreedharan held, “…it is necessary for us to order that in cases under Section 376 or POCSO related offences, the authorities of the State which means the Police, the FSL and the Doctors examining the prosecutrix are to be made aware that the name of the prosecutrix is not to be given and the parentage of the prosecutrix be shown only without prosecutrix’s address.”

Senior Advocate Syed Faisal Qadri represented the Appellant, while Assisting Counsel Rahella Khan represented the Respondent.

It was brought to the Court’s attention that the name of the Prosecutrix was disclosed in the few pages of the appeal Memo, which were documents relied upon in the charge sheet.

The Bench thus ordered, “Under the circumstances, the office is requested to forthwith redact the name of the prosecutrix from the aforementioned pages and make necessary changes to the digital copy of the court also. The office shall also take into account such other additional pages as given to it by the learned counsel for the Union Territory in addition to the pages already mentioned hereinabove and if the name of the prosecutrix is mentioned in those pages, redact the same from the physical file and also from the digital file.”

Referring to the judgment in Vipul Sexana and Others v. Union of India & Others (2019) wherein the Supreme Court has issued various directions, the Bench held, “…the Union Territory of J&K shall sensitize all organs which are involved in the investigating process with regard to the guidelines cited in the aforementioned judgment of the Supreme Court.”

The High Court listed the appeal on March 17 after the directions for redacting the pages are complied with by the Registry. “A copy of this order be served upon the Registrar Judicial, Srinagar to ensure compliance”, the Bench further ordered.

Cause Title: Fazil Saleem Bhat v. Union Territory Through Police Station Ram Munshi Bagh and Ors (Case No.: CrlA(D) 11/2025)

Appearance:

Appellant: Senior Advocate Syed Faisal Qadri, Advocate Bhat Shafi

Respondent: Assisting Counsel Rahella Khan

Click here to read/download Order


Jammu & Kashmir & Ladakh High CourtJustice Puneet GuptaJustice Atul Sreedharan

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.