Bhubaneswar: The Commissionerate Police is in a tight spot after it revealed details about the identity of a minor tribal girl student of a city school who was a victim of sexual abuse.
The issue has become a major controversy after the incident appeared in the media. The Assembly Tuesday witnessed an intense debate over the shameful incident as Opposition leaders sought a through probe into the matter.
Amidst the uproar, the police Monday swung into action and arrested the accused youth. Commissionerate Police soon issued a press note with details about the case registered and other developments.
The Commissionerate Police revealed the address of the victim in the press release making her identity public. It is quite baffling how the police forgot provisions of the POCSO Act, the judgements of courts and the guidelines issues by government agencies.
In the press note, the police gave detailed address of the accused, and said that he is a neighbour of the girl at a slum in the City.
Section 23 of the POCSO Act clearly says that identity of the victim includes her name, address, neighbourhood, photograph, family details or ‘any particular which may disclose the identity of the victim’.
The handbook of guidelines jointly prepared by the Bureau of Police Research & Development has advised cops investigating cases under the POCSO Act and Juvenile Justice Act to “ensure that the child’s identity is never disclosed to the media.”
The book, ‘A Handbook on the Legal Processes for the Police in respect of Crimes against Children’ says, “It should be ensured that the identity of the child – name; address, parent’s name, name of the school etc., are not disclosed to or published by the media.”
The irresponsible act by the Commissionerate Police has raised questions about the lack of basic knowledge regarding procedures and guidelines while conducting investigations under the POCSO Act, 2012 and the JJ Act 2015.
Speaking to Orissa POST, the Director of Childline, Bhubaneswar, Benudhar Senapati said, “It is shameful as the police who should have been the custodian of the victim had revealed her address to the media. The JJ Act and other Acts have clearly barred anyone from revealing the identity of the minor victim who would be now treated disdainfully by society.”