Suraj V Sukumar @ Suraj Palakaran vs State of Kerala - S.23 POCSO Act - Criminal Proceedings Quashed

POCSO Act- Section 23 - In this case, the accused-appellant uploaded a news on his YouTube Channel where the pictures of the father of the child and their relatives appeared. This led to the disclosure of the identity of the victim child - Case was registered under Sections 23 and 23(4) of the POCSO Act - High Court declined to quash proceedings - In Appeal, Supreme Court observed: Ordinarily, the view taken by the High Court, being the correct statement of law, ought to be affirmed by this Court. There can be no exception that the disclosure of the identity of a child victim is no less serious than the original offence alleged in this case. The explanation submitted by the appellant, however, in this regard merits some consideration. He has stated on an affidavit that he neither disclosed the identity of the victim child nor ever intended to do so. He has further explained that the indirect disclosure of the identity of the victim child did not lower the reputation of the child or his mother. It is difficult for this Court to conclusively accept or reject this assertion. However, taking into consideration all the attending circumstances, and with a view to afford an opportunity to the appellant to reform himself and ensure that no such serious lapse takes place in future, appeal allowed in the following terms: Criminal Proceedings quashed subject to furnishing an unconditional undertaking by way of affidavits—one before the above- 3 mentioned Police Station and another before the jurisdictional Sessions Judge within one week, giving an undertaking that in the future programs, he will not upload by himself or through associates any such incriminating material, and no such lapse will ever occur and that he shall meticulously follow the stringent provisions of the POCSO Act or other penal laws in this regard.