Ahmedabad: Gujarat High Court has refused to quash an FIR registered against Congress party leader Pragati Aahir over a social media post that allegedly disclosed the identity of a minor sexual assault victim in Rajkot district.Though Aahir had blurred the picture of the victim in her social media post, what caused trouble for her was the background of the photographs and video that revealed the surroundings of the victim’s neighbourhood and the pictures of the victim’s relatives.According to Aahir’s petition, she had exposed alleged sexual exploitation of a six-year-old by 13 persons and visited the child’s residence with colleagues to offer support and legal guidance.During the visit, she uploaded a written post on her Facebook profile along with photographs and short video clips. The Atkot police filed an FIR against her alleging that while faces were blurred, the visuals showed the victim’s residential area and surroundings and included images of family members, enabling identification of the child and relatives. She was accused of posting it for publicity. Provisions of BNS and Pocso Act for victim’s identity revelation were invoked against her.Aahir moved HC for quashing of the FIR and contended that the post did not disclose the child’s name, address, school or personal particulars, and that blurring demonstrated bona fide intent. She contended that mere visibility of locality and surroundings did not amount to direct or indirect disclosure, and cited constitutional protections under Articles 19(1)(a) and 21. She also submitted that Pocso Act, as a special law, should prevail, and that Section 23 offences are punishable below one year.The prosecution maintained that revealing the residence and surrounding landmarks, together with family photographs, could expose the child to retaliation and violated the child’s privacy rights, warranting prosecution.After the hearing, Justice M K Thakker said the law bars publication of any report, comment or photograph that could harm a child’s reputation or privacy. Media cannot reveal a child’s identity, and publishers violating these provisions can be held jointly and severally liable.HC further said, “In the opinion of this court, a prima facie case is made out against the present applicant for disclosing the identity of the minor victim of sexual assault. The case certainly requires a trial and, in that background, it cannot be said that the impugned FIR deserves any interference. No case is made out for interference in the exercise of the inherent jurisdiction of this Court.”
