BABITA KUMARI Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A middle-aged lady, posted as Head Constable with Himachal Police, and who is an alleged victim of sexual harassment, wrongful restraint, insult, and criminal intimidation, has come up before this Court against the impugned order passed by Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirmaur at Nahan, HP, transferring the above-captioned Trial to the Court-Martial, accepting the request of Competent Authority under S. 125 of Army Act, 1950.

(2.) While filing this petition, the victim has revealed her identity and did not conceal the same. Sec. 228(2)(A), IPC provides for the exemption from printing or publication of the name of the victim, which may know her identity. As per Sec. 228(2)(3) IPC, the penal provision does not apply when the publication is by or with the authorization in writing of the victim. Since the victim has revealed her identity in this petition, she explicitly does not call for concealment of her identity. Given above, there is no need to change her name in the memo of parties by substituting her name and concealing her identity with a fictitious name.

(3.) The facts of the case relevant to adjudicate the present controversy are that on 24/3/2017, the victim gave a written complaint to the Superintendent of Police, District Sirmaur. She stated that due to her mother's ill health, she could not report the matter on time. However, the incident pertains to 9/3/2017. She alleged that on 9/3/2017, after discharging her duties, she was returning to her home on a Scooty. At around 7.15/7/30 p.m., when she reached near RP-II gate, the sentry stopped her and inquired where she was going. She told him that she was going to her house. On this, the sentry demanded ID proof. However, the victim told him that at that time, she had not ID proof with her. However, she told him the address of her house and also about the ill health of her mother. She requested to cross the gate. After that, the said sentry started insulting her and hurling abuses at her. In between, more army officials came, and eventually, A-1(R-3) and A-2 (R-4) indulged in sexual harassment, criminal intimidation, wrongful restrain, which led to the registration of FIR captioned above.