Delhi High Court Refuses To Quash 2016 FIR Against Former DCW Chief Swati Maliwal For 'Naming' 14-Yr-Old Rape Victim

The Delhi High Court has recently refused to quash FIR registered in 2016 against Rajya Sabha MP and former Delhi Commission for Women (DCW) Chief for allegedly revealing the identity of a 14-year-old rape victim.

The minor girl had died in a hospital here after a neighbour allegedly raped her repeatedly in city's Burari area in 2016. As per the FIR, the minor was forced a corrosive substance down her throat which damaged her internal organs.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna refused to quash the FIR which was initially registered for the offence under Section 228A of Indian Penal Code, 1860, which prohibits publication of a victim's identity in rape and sexual assault cases.

The provision was later dropped and Section 74 along with Section 86 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 were added. Chargesheet was also filed in the matter.

The Court referred to Section 74, which prohibits disclosure of identity of children, and noted that if any Newspaper, Magazine, News-Sheet or Audio-Visual Media or other forms disclose the name or any particulars which may lead to identification of the child in conflict with law or child in need of care and protection, would be an offence punishable.

The Court noted that a notice was issued to the SHO concerned which got published on the WhatsApp Group of DCW which was circulated to the News Channels wherein the name of the prosecutrix was disclosed.

“Prima facie, offence under Section 74 read with Section 86 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 is clearly disclosed,” the Court said.

Justice Krishna disposed of the petition filed by DCW seeking re-investigations by a SIT in the rape case of the minor victim FIR as well as quashing of the FIR registered against Maliwal, including the chargesheet and and other proceedings. The plea also sought compensation for the mother of the victim and her family.

Justice Krishna noted that though Maliwal had sought investigations by SIT in the rape case as well as the FIR filed over kidnapping of the victim after she had went missing, chargesheets were filed in the two cases in 2016 and both the cases were pending trial.

The Court said that the relief of constitution of an SIT had become infructuous as it was for the Trial Court to consider the same, adding that no fruitful purpose would be served by referring further investigations to SIT.

Justice Krishna further rejected Maliwal's objection that the cognizance on the Chargesheet in the FIR against her was bad in law.

Regarding compensation prayer, the Court noted that Rs. 50,000 was already disbursed by the Delhi Legal Service Authority to the parents of the victim.

“The parents may also claim compensation under the Delhi Victims Compensation Scheme, 2018, by moving an appropriate Application before the Trial Court,” the Court said.

Title: DELHI COMMISSION FOR WOMEN v. STATE OF NCT DELHI & ORS.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 204

Click here to read order