Case Title: XYZ v. State of Madhya Pradesh
The Supreme Court has issued several directives to the trial courts to prevent the suffering and harassment of women who file complaints of sexual harassment, reinforcing the significance of the Courts treating the victims of sexual offences sympathetically. The Court mandated that all proceedings involving sexual harassment must be permitted to proceed behind closed doors. Section 327 CrPC specifies that only rape cases must have in-camera trials. The Court has broadened this ambit.
The appellant, a yoga instructor, claimed that the Institute's then-Vice-Chancellor grabbed her improperly in March 2019, prompting her to disengage and yell at him. She claimed that after she rebuffed his demands, she was threatened with being fired from her job.
The appellant's complaints were transferred from the Superintendent of Police to the Judicial Magistrate First Class under Section 156(3) of the CrPC, but no substantial action was taken. The police were instructed by the JMFC to submit a status report, but the Covid-19 epidemic delayed the JMFC's proceedings. JMFC treated it as a complaint and under section 482 of CrPC she approached the High court however her application was dismissed. Then, she approached the Supreme Court appealing the High court's order.
In the present case, the issue raised before the Supreme court was:
Why did the JMFC and High court not direct appropriate action against her application?
Concerning the issue, the Supreme Court acknowledged that in cases involving allegations of sexual harassment, sexual assault, or any other similar criminal allegation, in which the victim may already have undergone trauma, the courts should press the police to conduct an investigation rather than adding to the complainant's burden. The court held that the JMFC must have exercised jurisdiction under Section 156(3) of CrPC to direct the police to investigate.
The court determined that because victims of sexual assault are suffering from trauma and societal humiliation, judicial proceedings are typically more burdensome for them. Relying on the case Aparna Bhat v State of Madhya Pradesh, the court held the courts needed to handle these cases properly and sensitively.
The Court ordered as follows :
It is the duty and responsibility of trial courts to deal with the aggrieved persons before them in an appropriate manner, by:
- Allowing proceedings to be conducted in camera, when appropriate, either under Section 327 CrPC or when the case otherwise involves the aggrieved person (or other witnesses) testifying as to their experience of sexual harassment/violence;
- Allowing the installation of a screen to ensure that the aggrieved woman does not have to see the accused while testifying or the alternative, directing the accused to leave the room while the aggrieved woman's testimony is being recorded;
- Ensuring that the counsel for the accused conducts the cross-examination of the aggrieved woman in a respectful fashion and without asking inappropriate questions, especially regarding the sexual history of the aggrieved woman. Also allowing cross-examination to be conducted in a manner that the counsel for the accused submits her questions to the court, who then poses them to the aggrieved woman;
- Completing cross-examination in one sitting, as far as possible.
In order to ensure that justice did not remain inaccessible, the court directed trial courts to deal with the aggrieved persons before them in an appropriate manner.
The court categorically stated that:
“It is important for all courts to remain cognizant of the fact that the legal process tends to be even more onerous for complainants who are potentially dealing with trauma and societal shame due to the unwarranted stigma attached to victims of sexual harassment and assault. At this juncture, especially in cases where the police fail to address the grievance of such complainants, the Courts have an important responsibility."
Thus, the appeal was allowed and the court held that the JMFC must have exercised jurisdiction under Section 156(3) of CrPC to direct the police to investigate.