BHUPINDER SHARMA Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Enhancement of sentence from four years' R.I. as awarded by the Court to 10 years as done by the Himachal Pradesh High Court for an offence of rape punishable under Sec. 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short "I.P.C.") is the subject-matter of challenge in this appeal.

(2.) We do not propose to mention the name of the victim. Sec. 228-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short "I.P.C.") makes disclosure of the identity of victims of certain offence is punishable. Printing or publishing the name or any matter which may make known the identity of any person against whom an offence under Secs. 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 the High Court or the Supreme Court. But keeping in view the social object of preventing social victimisation or ostracism of the victim of a sexual offence for which Sec. 228-A has been enacted, it would be appropriate that in the judgments, be it of a High Court or a 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 examination of the case would be restricted to the question of sentence only. The appellant was found guilty of offence punishable under Sec. 376 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. and Sec. 342 read with Sec. 34 thereof. The enhancement of sentence was done in respect of offence punishable under Sec. 376 I.P.C.