8.

As per the submissions of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, Section 228A IPC is
restrictive in relation to the proceedings going on before the court, and once the proceeding or
investigation comes to an end, Section 228A IPC would not be attracted. It is also submitted that the
expression "alleged or found to have been committed" used in sub-section (1) of Section 228A IPC also is
in relation to a pending proceeding. It is further submitted that the jurisprudence of the precedent law
laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Punjab Vs. Gurmit Singh, reported in (1996) 2 SCC 384
was that the victim should be comfortable and anonymity should be maintained throughout the
proceedings, but the same did not mean, 'after the judgment'. The point raised by the learned Senior
Counsel for the petitioners was that the judgments were already in the public domain and nobody could
have been punished for publishing any part of the judgment of the court.

(12 of 37) [CRLMP-629/2007] Section 5.13 However, to fortify the present law, we 228A, IPC (New)
recommend that there should be inserted, in the recommend Indian Penal Code, a new section - say, as
ed.

section 228A - in the following terms :-

Section 228A, I.P.C.

(To be inserted) "228A. Where, by any enactment for the time being in force, the printing or publication
of any matter in relation to a proceeding held in a Court in Camera is declared to be unlawful, any
person who prints or publishes any matter in violation of such prohibition shall be punished
Consequential amendment with fine which may extent to rupees one of other laws.

22. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners also argued that Section 228A (2)(b) authorizes the victim
to give her name, and thus, the interviews given by the victim herself in relation to the present case
amounted to such deemed authorization by her.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners also stated that as per Section 228A(1) IPC, any person who
makes known the identity of a person against whom the sexual offence has been committed, shall come
within the ambit of Section 228A IPC, whereas in the present case, the identity of the victim was already
disclosed in the judgment prior to its publication and printing.

43. The learned trial court has passed a reasoned order, whereby it has rightly dealt with the provisions
of Section 327 Cr.P.C. and Section 228A IPC and after dealing with the aspect of printing and publication
of the name of the victim in the case (37 of 37) [CRLMP-629/2007] concerned has rightly taken
cognizance while ignoring the impact of apology tendered by Prabhu Chawla and Manoj Verma as being
inconsequential to the offences committed under Section 228A IPC and illegality defined under Section
327 Cr.P.C.