Media Cannot Violate Privacy of POCSO Victims: Madras High Court Dismisses News Channel's Plea to Quash FIR

Exposing Identity of a Child Victim Is a Serious Offense Under POCSO Act - In a significant judgment delivered on March 3, 2025, the Madras High Court dismissed a petition filed by News Tamil 24x7, seeking to quash an FIR registered against it for revealing the identity of a minor victim in a POCSO case. The Court, in News Tamil 24x7 v. Shruthi Thilak & Others, ruled that "disclosing the identity of a child victim, directly or indirectly, is a grave violation of the POCSO Act, and no media house can claim immunity under the guise of press freedom."

The news channel had published videos on September 3, 2023, and September 8, 2023, on its YouTube channel, exposing details about the victim’s family. The Court, referring to the Supreme Court’s decision in Nipun Saxena v. Union of India (2019) 2 SCC 703, observed that "the law strictly prohibits the disclosure of a child victim’s identity, and such breaches invite penal action under Section 23 of the POCSO Act."

"Publishing Victim’s Identity Violates Supreme Court Guidelines" – Court Finds No Merit in News Channel’s Defense

The petitioner argued that the complaint filed against it was politically motivated and that the channel had not disclosed any information violating legal provisions. The news outlet contended that journalistic freedom must be protected and that the FIR was an attempt to curb media reporting.

Rejecting these arguments, the Court ruled that "press freedom does not extend to violating the privacy of victims, particularly in sensitive cases involving minors. The law makes it abundantly clear that any publication, even if inadvertent, which reveals the identity of a POCSO victim is a punishable offense."

The Court referred to the landmark judgment in Nipun Saxena v. Union of India, which held that "the identity of a victim must be kept confidential, and no person, including media houses, can publish any material that exposes such identity, directly or indirectly."

"Special Court Had Jurisdiction to Direct FIR Registration" – High Court Upholds Investigation Order

News Tamil 24x7 challenged the order of the Special Court for POCSO Cases, Chennai, which had directed the police to register an FIR based on a complaint filed by the de-facto complainant, Shruthi Thilak. The petitioner claimed that the Special Court had no authority to order an investigation and should have taken direct cognizance instead.

Rejecting this contention, the High Court ruled that "under Section 33 of the POCSO Act, a Special Court has the power to take cognizance of a complaint or direct an investigation if it deems fit. The argument that the Special Judge had exceeded jurisdiction is legally unsustainable."

The Court noted that the Special Judge, upon reviewing the complaint, directed the police to register an FIR under Section 23(4) of the POCSO Act. This was a lawful exercise of discretion, as further investigation was required to determine the extent of the media's violation."

"Protection of Child Victims Is Paramount" – Court Refuses to Quash FIR

The Court underscored the importance of protecting child victims from unnecessary exposure and media scrutiny, emphasizing that the POCSO Act was enacted to ensure a safe and confidential legal process for minors.

Observing that "safeguarding the identity of child victims is not just a legal obligation but a moral and ethical duty of the press," the Court ruled that "any violation of these safeguards must be met with strict legal consequences."

The High Court found that the registration of the FIR was justified, as a prima facie case had been made out against the petitioner. It directed the police to complete the investigation and submit a final report within two months.

Petition Dismissed, Investigation to Continue

Dismissing the plea of News Tamil 24x7, the High Court ruled that "there is no merit in the petition, and the investigation must proceed without interference. The media must exercise caution while reporting on sensitive cases, especially those involving child victims."

The Madras High Court has reaffirmed that "press freedom does not override the fundamental rights of child victims to privacy and dignity." The ruling serves as a strong reminder that "media organizations must strictly adhere to legal provisions while reporting on POCSO cases, as any violation will invite strict penal action."

By upholding the Special Court’s order and refusing to quash the FIR, the Court has sent a clear message that "journalistic ethics and responsible reporting must take precedence over sensationalism."

Date of decision: 03/03/2025