Who cares about the victim anyway?

BHUBANESWAR: The Supreme Court had clearly stated in 2003 and 2006 that identity of the victim should be kept confidential. That has not happened. Three days after the gangrape incident came to light, everyone knows everything about the victim - the village she belongs to, her parents, neighbours and probably road direction too. While Section 228-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) bars disclosure of the name or any matter which may make known the identity of the victim, the National Human Rights Commission has issued several guidelines on this matter too. Interestingly, though the apex court had ruled that lack of medical evidence is not grounds to discount a rape victim’s testimony, details purported to be the medical examination report of the gangrape victim are doing the rounds, courtesy some policemen. The case has gone to such an extent that even the victim’s father has given adverse statements about his daughter and distanced himself from her as well the person who she says is her brother-in-law. In fact, the brother-in-law has been put under scanner. The issue taking several twists and turns, sources said the mother of the victim is contemplating to move the human rights commission seeking protection of their individual rights. Going by her, the victim’s father was under pressure to speak against his daughter and her brother-in-law. The victim, on the other hand, told a private TV channel that her father was mentally torturing her. On Thursday, investigation into the matter continued with police recording statement of the mother of the victim. The two accused - Manoranjan Sahu and Ajay Malia - were arrested on Wednesday.