TNN | May 16, 2014, 12.56 AM IST
The accused, who is in custody on charges of alleged rape, had filed an application before the fast track court under Section 228 A IPC and prayed before the court to direct a suitable disciplinary or penal action against Sawant for revealing the name of the victim in the chargesheet.
Pol, in the order, stated that “There is no merit and substance in this application, as rightly pointed out by the special public prosecutor on the ground that the charge sheet filed in the case after the culmination of the investigation cannot be said to have propensity to make public the identity of the victim to fall within the mischief prohibited by section 228A IPC. The chargesheet does not come within the purview of the prohibition mentioned and contemplated in Section 228A IPC.”
Further, in the order, Pol said that on the contrary, the suppression of the victim’s name and other material and details pertaining to her, which are relied upon by the prosecution in the charge sheet would have violated the principles of natural justice, the concept of fair disclosure and the right of the accused to a fair trial.
Pol said that as in the view of the aforesaid instance, the application is dismissed.
The fast track court judge earlier had directed the prosecution to initiate steps to provide CCTV footage to Tejpal. The prosecution has filed the compliance report before pertaining to the order passed by the court to deliver relevant material to Tejpal.
The prosecution has also moved another application urging the court to handover the digital video recorder (DVR), which is a part of the chargesheet to send it to the central forensic science laboratory, Hyderabad, to make a mirror image of the CCTV footage.
Leave a Reply