Protecting Identities: A Police Officer’s Legal Duty and Guide

The Imperative of Protecting Identity

Law enforcement officers are ethically and legally bound to rigorously safeguard victim identities, especially in sensitive cases. This fundamental duty is paramount for ensuring victim safety, preventing re-traumatization, and fostering the vital trust necessary for crucial cooperation.

Unauthorized disclosure, however, profoundly jeopardizes victims, exposing them to potential harm or retaliation from perpetrators, and significantly undermining their willingness to participate in justice processes.

Such breaches also severely compromise ongoing investigations, potentially tainting evidence or allowing suspects to evade accountability. Furthermore, these grave professional missteps expose officers to severe criminal charges, substantial fines, court contempt, and serious departmental liabilities, thereby eroding public confidence in the integrity of law enforcement. In juvenile cases, the identity of the child in conflict with the law must also be protected.

Cases Mandating Victim Identity Protection

The identity of victims must never be disclosed in the following specific circumstances, as per Indian laws, judicial pronouncements, and ethical standards:

1. Victims of Rape and Other Sexual Offences

   Under Section 72 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, disclosing the identity of victims of rape, attempted rape, gang rape, or custodial rape is a serious criminal offence.

   • Ensure no identifiable details – such as name, photograph, address, or family information – are recorded or shared in a manner that could reveal the victim’s identity.
   • Publishing such identity is punishable by up to two years in prison and a fine.
   • Applies to offences specified in sections 64 to 71 BNS.
   • Disclosure permitted only:
     • By police for investigation (with written order and in good faith);
     • With the victim’s written consent;
     • If the victim is deceased, a minor, or mentally incapacitated, then with written consent of next of kin;
     • Next of kin may only authorize a recognized welfare institution or organization to disclose the identity.

2. Child Sexual Abuse Victims (POCSO Act, 2012)

   The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 stringently prohibits revealing any personal details of child victims (under 18 years) in all sexual offence cases.

   • Includes name, school, photograph, or other identifying information.
   • Confidentiality must be maintained in FIRs, Case Diaries, Charge Sheets, emails, WhatsApp, social media, and any communication with media.
   • Section 23 generally prohibits disclosure unless a Special Court specifically permits it in the child’s best interest.
   • Violation punishable by imprisonment for six months to one year, a fine, or both.

3. Juvenile Victims / Juvenile in Conflict with Law (Across All Crimes)

   Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 protects the identity of:

   • A child in conflict with law;
   • A child in need of care and protection;
   • A child victim or witness of a crime – irrespective of the nature of the crime.

   Contravention is punishable by imprisonment up to six months, a fine up to two lakh rupees, or both.

4. Acid Attack Victims

   Identity protection is critical to avoid social stigma, re-traumatization, and threats from perpetrators. Mandated by:

   • Supreme Court ruling in Laxmi v. Union of India;
   • Article 21 of the Constitution;
   • NHRC advisories – to preserve dignity, safety, and facilitate rehabilitation.

5. Victims of Human Trafficking

   Protecting the identities of trafficking victims ensures their safety and supports rehabilitation.

   • Child victims: Covered under Section 23 of POCSO Act and Section 74 of JJ Act.
   • Adult victims: Protection stems from Article 21 and judicial precedents.
   • Relevant laws include: Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, BNS (2023), and BNSS (2023).

Confidentiality for Victims – Workplace Sexual Harassment and Domestic Violence

Workplace Sexual Harassment

For victims of workplace sexual harassment, the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act), mandates strict confidentiality. This includes maintaining rigorous secrecy in all official documents – such as statements (e.g., under Section 180 BNSS), FIRs, and Case Diaries – and during all interactions with external entities like non-governmental organizations (NGOs) or support services.

Specifically, Section 16 of the POSH Act prohibits disclosing the victim’s identity and case details. A breach of this confidentiality can lead to a monetary penalty of ₹5,000, disciplinary action, or contempt of court in judicial settings.

Domestic Violence

Unlike the POSH Act, which explicitly penalizes confidentiality breaches, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, does not contain a specific penal provision for disclosing a victim’s identity. However, Section 16 of the D.V. Act allows for in-camera proceedings to ensure privacy during hearings.

Should a domestic violence case involve sexual violence, Section 72 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, may apply, making such disclosure punishable by up to two years’ imprisonment, a fine, or both. Courts may also invoke Article 21 of the Constitution or initiate contempt proceedings to safeguard the dignity and confidentiality of victims.

Victims of Cybercrimes

Protection for cybercrime victims is primarily established through various provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Notable sections include:

• 66E – Privacy violations
• 66C – Identity theft
• 66D – Cheating by personation
• 67 – Publication of obscene material
• 67A – Sexually explicit content

Additionally, Section 72 of BNS, 2023, explicitly prohibits disclosure of a victim’s identity in sexual offense cases, potentially covering cybercrimes as well.

For minors, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 – specifically Sections 13, 14, and 23 – provides enhanced safeguards against identity exposure and CSAM dissemination.

Judicial pronouncements have reinforced the importance of confidentiality. In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017), the Supreme Court established the right to privacy under Article 21. In Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), the Court struck down Section 66A of the IT Act. Cases like Nipun Saxena v. Union of India (2019) and Re: Indian Woman Says Gang-Raped (2014) affirm that identity disclosure in sexual offense cases is strictly prohibited.

Victims of Honour-Based Crimes

Protecting victims of honour-based crimes, especially in inter-caste or inter-religious relationships, is critical. While no specific anti-honour crime law exists, the Supreme Court’s directives in Shakti Vahini v. Union of India mandate state action to protect such individuals.

Honour killings are prosecuted under general penal provisions:

• Sections 100–105 BNS – Murder
• Section 109 BNS – Attempt to murder
• Sections 116 & 117 BNS – Grievous hurt
• Section 351 BNS – Criminal intimidation

Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) also provides a foundational legal shield for privacy and protection.

Cases Mandating Accused Identity Protection

Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, prohibits disclosure of a minor accused’s identity. This includes name, address, school, and photograph during all legal stages.

Non-compliance is punishable under Section 74(3) with up to six months’ imprisonment, a fine up to ₹2 lakh, or both.

Supreme Court Pronouncements

In Nipun Saxena v. Union of India (2019), the Supreme Court mandated absolute protection of sexual offense victims’ identities. The Court emphasized that even indirect disclosures are prohibited.

The ruling introduced safeguards such as:

• Sealing court records
• Conducting in-camera proceedings
• Criminalizing any identity disclosure

Consequences of Unauthorized Disclosure

Unauthorized disclosure leads to:

• Criminal prosecution under BNS, JJ Act, POCSO Act
• Departmental disciplinary action
• Contempt of court for breaching court orders

Essential Best Practices for Police Officers

To ensure compliance and victim safety:

• Use Coded Identifiers: e.g., “Victim A”, “Child X” in all documentation.
• In-Camera Proceedings: Prefer private settings for statements and questioning.
• Mark Documents as Confidential: Clearly label all case files accordingly.
• Secure Information Sharing: Do not share identifiable information via unauthorized channels.
• Non-disclosure of Information: Avoid any information leaks during press interactions.

Conclusion

For police officers, protecting victim identities is a legal, moral, and professional duty. Statutes like the BNS (2023), POCSO Act, JJ Act, POSH Act, and Article 21 of the Constitution enforce this. Breaches can result in criminal charges, disciplinary action, and contempt proceedings.

By following best practices such as using coded identifiers, holding in-camera proceedings, and securing sensitive documentation, officers can uphold justice, maintain public trust, and preserve victim dignity.