- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
THE STATE OF KERALA v. SISTER AMALA
Factual and Procedural Background
Crime No. 1012/2018 of Kuravilangadu Police Station was registered against the respondents—both nuns—under Section 228-A of the Indian Penal Code for allegedly disclosing, through WhatsApp, the identity of a rape victim involved in Crime No. 746/2018 (registered under Sections 342, 376(2)(k), 376(2)(n), 376-A and 506 IPC). Investigation subsequently revealed that the respondents had emailed the victim’s photograph to three unnamed media persons. A final report was submitted under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was taken on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Pala, as S.T. No. 4981/2019.
The respondents filed Criminal M.C. No. 1184/2022 before the High Court of Kerala seeking quashment of the final report and all further proceedings. By order dated 03 March 2022, the High Court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings. Challenging that order, the State of Kerala filed the present Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 7159 of 2022 before the Supreme Court of India. On 05 August 2022, the Supreme Court orally dismissed the SLP, stating that detailed reasons would follow; the present order supplies those reasons.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether the Supreme Court should grant leave to appeal and set aside the High Court’s order quashing proceedings against the respondents under Section 228-A IPC.
- Whether, in the circumstances of the case, continuation of criminal proceedings four years after the alleged disclosure would further— or defeat— the protective purpose underlying Section 228-A IPC.
Arguments of the Parties
The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.
Table of Precedents Cited
| Precedent | Rule or Principle Cited For | Application by the Court |
|---|---|---|
| Nipun Saxena & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. (2019) 2 SCC 703 | Prohibits printing or publishing the name or any identifying detail of a sexual-offence victim in print, electronic or social media. | Reiterated to underscore the legislative intent behind Section 228-A IPC and to state clearly what conduct is forbidden. |
| Mahant Sital Das v. Sant Ram & Ors. AIR 1954 SC 606 | Observes that entry into a religious order generally operates as “civil death,” creating a spiritual family separate from the natural family. | Cited to contextualise the respondents’ status as nuns and to note the communal relationships that arise upon taking religious vows. |
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The Court began by reaffirming the purpose of Section 228-A IPC: to prevent the social victimisation and ostracism of sexual-offence victims. Relying on Nipun Saxena, the Bench noted that any disclosure enabling identification of a victim is proscribed. It further observed that both the accused and the victim are members of a religious order; referencing Mahant Sital Das, it explained that entry into such an order creates a spiritual family, hinting at the close-knit context in which the disclosure occurred.
Despite expressing disapproval of the High Court’s reasoning, the Supreme Court emphasised the passage of time—four years since the incident in 2018—and concluded that reopening the matter could, “in the peculiar circumstances,” undermine the very objective of Section 228-A IPC. The Court therefore declined to “open the issue any further” and chose to let the High Court’s quashing order stand.
Holding and Implications
Holding: The Special Leave Petition is DISMISSED; the High Court’s order quashing proceedings against the respondents remains in force.
Implications: The criminal case in S.T. No. 4981/2019 will not proceed, and the respondents face no further prosecution under Section 228-A IPC for the 2018 disclosure. While the Court reiterated the mandatory confidentiality protections in sexual-offence cases, it set no new precedent on their application, limiting its decision to the case’s unique factual and temporal context.
Page 1 of 5 Non-Reportable
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 7159 of 2022 The State of Kerala
…Petitioner
Versus
Sister Amala & Anr.
…Respondents
O R D E R
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
1. This petition seeking leave to appeal is filed by State of Kerala against the final order dated 03.03.2022 passed by High Court of Kerala in Criminal MC No. 1184/2022, whereby all further proceedings against the petitioners therein/respondents herein in Crime No. 1019/2018 of Kuravilangadu Police Station were quashed. On 05.08.2022 when this matter came up for hearing the SLP was dismissed observing that the detailed judgment/order would follow. The order dated 05.08.2022 reads thus:
"Although, we do not appreciate the finding recorded by the High Court in the impugned judgment
1
by looking to the fact that this is a matter of 2018 and four years have rolled by this time.
In changed circumstances, this court may not like to open the issue any further.
The special leave petition is dismissed accordingly.
The detailed judgment/order to follow." This detailed order is being passed in terms of the afore- quoted order dated 05.08.2022.
2. Crime No. 1012/2018 of Kuravilangadu Police Station was registered against the respondents herein, who are nuns, under Section 228A of Indian Penal Code (IPC) for having disclosed the identity of the rape victim in Crime No. 746/2018 of Kuravilangadu Police Station registered under Sections 342, 376(2)(k), 376(2)(n), 376A and 506, IPC. The criminal law was set in motion by the First Information Statement (FIS) to the effect that the respondents herein have published photograph of the victim in the aforementioned crime through social media platform, WhatsApp. Obviously, in the investigation conducted it was found that the respondents had actually sent e-mail to three un-named persons working as media persons and consequently, the final report to that effect was filed under
2
Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.PC) and ultimately it was taken as S.T. No. 4981/2019 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Pala. The stated Criminal MC was filed by the respondents herein seeking quashment of final report in S.T. No. 4981/2019 and all further proceedings pursuant thereto.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. We have already made it clear in the order dated 05.08.2022, for the reasons stated therein, that though we do not appreciate the finding recorded by the High Court in the impugned order, we do not think it necessary to open the issue any further.
4. The very avowed purpose and object of introduction of Section 228-A of IPC as per Amendment Act 43 of 1983 with effect from 25.12.1983, is to prevent social victimisation or ostracism of the victim of a sexual offence. This Court in Nipun Saxena & Anr.
v. Union of India & Ors.1held that no person shall print or publish in print, electronic, social media, etc. the name of the victim in a sexual offence or in a remote manner disclose any fact which could leave the victim being identified or which should
1 (201 9) 2 SCC 703
3
make her identity known to the public at large, taking it into account the legislative intent viz., to protect such victims from any hostile discrimination or harassment in future. Thus, now in view of the provisions under Section 228-A, IPC and the decision in Nipun Saxena's case (supra), it is clear as to what is permitted and what is not permitted, under the said provision. As stated earlier the respondents herein who were accused of commission of offence under Section 228A, IPC and the victim in the stated crime are nuns. In the decision in Mahant Sital Das v. Sant Ram & Ors.2at paragraph 20 this Court held "It is well known that entrance into a religious order generally operates as a civil death. The man who becomes an ascetic severs his connection with the members of his natural family and being adopted by his preceptor becomes, so to say, a spiritual son of the latter. The other disciples of his Guru are regarded as his brothers, while the co-disciples of his Guru are looked upon as uncles and in this way a spiritual family is established on the analogy of a natural family."
5. This, general consequences would follow when someone takes the veil and joins a nunnery. By taking of perpetual vow
4
the nun concerned joins the other members of the said holy order and thereby, the other members of the nunnery would form kindred. As noted in the order dated 05.08.2022, the occurrence is of the year 2018 and four years have lapsed by then. Taking all such circumstances, even while stressing the need to adhere to the mandate under Section 228-A, IPC, we do not intent to proceed with the matter any further as proceeding further may, in the peculiar circumstances, defeat the object and purpose of the said provision. Accordingly, the Special Leave Petition stands dismissed.
……………………, J. (Ajay Rastogi) ……………………, J. (C.T. Ravikumar) New Delhi;
August 05, 2022
5
Alert