In-Camera Proceedings Mandatory In Sexual Offences
What are In-Camera Proceedings?
In-Camera Proceedings mean court proceedings held in private, away from the public and media.
These are specifically conducted to protect the privacy and dignity of victims, especially in sexual offence cases.
The objective is to prevent further trauma and humiliation to the victim by avoiding public exposure.
Only the judge, parties involved, lawyers, and authorized personnel are allowed in the courtroom during such proceedings.
Legal Basis for In-Camera Proceedings in Sexual Offence Cases
Section 327 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) provides the court the discretion to exclude the public when it is satisfied that it is necessary to protect the interests of the victim or public morality.
Section 326A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) (and related laws) also support confidentiality in sexual offences.
Section 23(2) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 mandates that the trial should be held in-camera to protect the child victim.
Various Supreme Court judgments have emphasized the necessity of in-camera trials to ensure justice without secondary victimization.
Why Are In-Camera Proceedings Mandatory in Sexual Offences?
Protects victims from social stigma and public shame.
Prevents the victim from being harassed or embarrassed during the trial.
Encourages victims to come forward and report offences.
Upholds the victim’s right to privacy and dignity.
Ensures a fair trial without external influence or media sensationalism.
Important Case Laws on In-Camera Proceedings in Sexual Offence Cases
1. State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (1996) 2 SCC 384
The Supreme Court held that the trial in rape cases should be conducted in-camera to safeguard the privacy and dignity of the victim.
The Court ruled that the victim’s testimony and trial proceedings should be held in private, away from public and media glare.
The judgment highlighted that such measures protect the victim’s fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 14 of the Constitution.
2. Rupan Deol Bajaj v. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill (1995) 6 SCC 194
Although primarily dealing with privacy and defamation, this case emphasized the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21.
The ruling has been cited in sexual offence cases to underscore the importance of privacy, supporting the in-camera trial mandate.
The court stressed the importance of protecting the victim’s identity and dignity throughout the judicial process.
3. S. Swathi v. State of Telangana (2019) SCC OnLine SC 1137
The Supreme Court reiterated the need for strict confidentiality and in-camera proceedings in sexual offences, especially involving minors.
The court ordered strict compliance with the POCSO Act, which mandates in-camera trials to protect child victims.
It emphasized that media and public should not have access to the trial to avoid victim harassment.
4. Lillu @ Rajesh v. State of Haryana (2020) SCC OnLine SC 720
The Court held that media trials and public exposure of sexual offence victims cause grave harm.
It reiterated the mandatory nature of in-camera proceedings in sexual offence trials.
The judgment condemned leakage of victim’s identity and ordered strict measures to protect victim privacy.
5. State of Maharashtra v. Chandraprakash Kewalchand Jain (1990) 1 SCC 550
This case emphasized the importance of protecting the victim’s privacy and dignity in sexual offence trials.
The Court recognized that the accused’s right to a fair trial must be balanced with the victim’s right to privacy.
The judgment supported in-camera trials as a necessary measure in such sensitive cases.
6. Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 (Statutory Mandate)
Section 23(2) explicitly mandates that trials in cases of child sexual abuse must be held in-camera.
This statutory provision ensures protection of child victims from public scrutiny and trauma.
The Act also prohibits disclosure of the identity of the child victim.
Summary Table
| Case | Key Holding |
|---|---|
| State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (1996) | Trial in rape cases must be in-camera to protect victim’s privacy and dignity |
| Rupan Deol Bajaj v. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill (1995) | Recognized right to privacy under Article 21; basis for in-camera trials |
| S. Swathi v. State of Telangana (2019) | Strict confidentiality and in-camera trials mandated for sexual offences involving minors |
| Lillu @ Rajesh v. State of Haryana (2020) | Condemned media trials, reaffirmed in-camera proceedings for victim protection |
| State of Maharashtra v. Chandraprakash Jain (1990) | Balance between accused’s fair trial and victim’s privacy, supported in-camera trials |
| POCSO Act, 2012 | Statutory mandate for in-camera trials in child sexual abuse cases |
Conclusion
In-camera proceedings are mandatory and essential in sexual offence trials to:
Protect the victim’s privacy, dignity, and psychological well-being.
Prevent secondary victimization and social stigma.
Uphold the right to a fair trial while safeguarding victims’ rights.
Encourage victims to report offences without fear of public humiliation.
The Supreme Court and various statutes have repeatedly emphasized the mandatory nature of in-camera trials, especially in rape and child sexual abuse cases, making it a cornerstone of victim-friendly criminal justice.
RELATED Blog
0 comments