ABHUPINDER SHARMA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Enhancement of sentence from four years RI as awarded by the trial Court to 10 years as done by the Himachal Pradesh High Court for an offence of rape punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the IPC) is the subject matter of challenge in this appeal.

(2.) We do not propose to mention name of the victim. Section 228-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the IPC) makes disclosure of identity of victim of certain offences punishable. Printing or publishing name of any matter which may make known the identity of any person against whom an offence under Sections 376, 376-A, 376-B, 376-C or 376-D is alleged or found to have been committed can be punished. True it is, the restriction does not relate to printing or publication of judgment by High Court or Supreme Court. But keeping in view the social object of preventing social victimization or ostracisms of the victim of a sexual offence for which Section 228-A has been enacted, it would be appropriate that in the judgments, be it of High Court or lower Court, the name of the victim should not be indicated. We have chosen to describe her as victim in the judgment.

(3.) While issuing notice by order dated 8-1-2002 it was clearly indicated by this Court that explanation of the case would be restricted to the question of sentence only. Appellant was found guilty of offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section 34, IPC and Section 342 read with Section 34 thereof. The enhancement of sentence was done in respect of offence punishable under Section 376, IPC.