The Phaltan Case and Dignity of the Victim

Why in News?

The suicide of a young doctor in Phaltan, Satara district, Maharashtra, highlights significant gaps between legal reforms and societal attitudes toward gender-based violence.

What are the key issues highlighted?

• Failure of administrative systems – The first crime is her pleas for help were reportedly ignored by administrative systems, highlighting institutional failure.
• Secondary victimisation by society – The second crime is the public character assassination that follows when a victim’s family begin their quest for justice.
• It was evident in the comments made by the Chairperson of the Maharashtra State Commission for Women, about the victim’s private communications and relationships.
• This amounted to character assassination, shifting blame onto the victim and perpetuating patriarchal attitudes.

What are key legal provisions available?

• Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 – Also known as Nirbhaya Act, which specifically designed to dismantle the very foundation of character assassination in rape trials, often used in the public sphere.
• Section 50 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023 (Section 53A IEA, 1872) – It legally implies that a woman’s personal life, her friendships, messages or habits cannot be used by the defence to argue that she “deserved it” or that her consent should be presumed.
• Section 48 of BSA, 2023 (Sec 146 of IEA, 1872) – It prohibit questions being put to a victim during cross-examination regarding her “general immoral character or previous sexual experience.
• Section 72 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 (Section 228A IPC) – It prohibits disclosure of a sexual assault victim’s identity.

What are the important SC Judgements that shield the dignity of victims/survivors of sexual violence?

• Irrelevance of prior sexual history – In the State Of Punjab vs Gurmit Singh & Ors. (1996), the Court stated that the victim’s testimony should not be doubted simply because she is a woman and the.
• It warned against dismissing a victim’s evidence based on a perception of “loose morals”, stating that every woman, regardless of her character, has the right to refuse sexual intercourse.
• Insult to injury – The Court has repeatedly observed, under wider scope, that subjecting a victim to intense scrutiny, searching for minor discrepancies, and casting aspersions on her character only add “insult to injury” — a clear condemnation of the very essence of victim-blaming.
• Ban on identity disclosure – In 2018 and 2019, the Court has mandated that no person shall print or publish the name or any matter that may make known the identity of a sexual assault victim.
  • Scope of Ban – This blanket ban extends even to a deceased person unless a competent authority determines otherwise.
  • Purpose – To prevent public shaming and character assassination that often follow disclosure.

What are the violations in the Phaltan case?

• Media Scrutiny – The victim’s dying declaration was subjected to media exposure, violating confidentiality and interfered with the Commission’s investigation.
• Legal Implications – Such disclosure raises questions about the investigation’s progression into abetment to suicide or murder.
• Prima Facie Evidence – The dying declaration itself points to abetment to suicide.
• Impact on Victim’s Family
  • Restricted Access – Lawyers for the complainant were denied access to the investigation report.
  • Secondary Trauma – The victim’s relatives suffered further distress as her personal information was circulated in the media, compounding their grief.
• Character Assassination in Public Sphere – The Phaltan case shows how institutional commentary can inadvertently result in character assassination, a practice strictly prohibited in judicial proceedings.
• Extra‑Judicial Victim Shaming – Public functionaries used details of the victim’s personal communication.
• They create a public opinion, a “social verdict”, that tries the victim’s character, effectively achieving the ‘second crime’ that the 2013 Amendment was designed to eradicate from judicial procedure.
• Legal vs. Moral Breach – This act, while not technically a violation of the ban on identity disclosure (as the victim’s name was widely known), is a breach of the spirit of the judicial directions: to treat the victim with fairness, respect and dignity.
• Institutional Failure – It is an institutional act of de facto character assassination, undermining the constitutional and legal safeguards designed to protect victims.

What lies ahead?

• Training & Sensitisation – The police, prosecutors, and judges must be trained and sensitised to understand and respond empathetically.
• To focus on the trauma that victims endure, especially in sensitive cases that concern sexual assault and domestic violence.
• End victim blaming – As a society, need to stop being tolerant of societal attitudes that question a victim’s character.
• There is also a need to transform the investigation culture making it truly victim-friendly.
• Resource boost – The new criminal law lays an emphasis on forensic and digital evidence, but there is a lack of infrastructure.
• It is time to expand laboratories, invest in advanced forensic facilities, have dedicated women’s desks, and ensure accessible legal aid.
• This will make safeguards such as audio-visual statements and clear victim communication the standard tools of justice.

Reference

The Hindu | The Phaltan case is also about a victim’s dignity