Delhi court acquits Swati Maliwal accused of revealing rape victim’s name

Swati Maliwal, former president of a Delhi Court, Deputy and Delhi Women’s Commission (DCW) on Wednesday, August 14, 2025, accused the identity of the 14 -year -old sacrifice who succumbed to injuries.

Additional Judicial Judicial Judge Neha Mittal was acquitted of DCW’s Public Relations Officer Bhupender Singh.

Prosecutor’s Office claimed that Mr. Singh explained the name of the small sacrifice to the electronic media by the order of Mrs. Maliwal.

According to the Fir, the notification sent by Mrs. Maliwal as the President of the DCW, which was tried to have information about the investigation in the rape case, was shown by a WhatsApp group “deliberately wandered” and a TV channel.

Emir, “Prosecution, child justice (care and protection of children) 74. Pursuant to the criminal commission could not prove, the defendants beyond a reasonable suspicion of children’s justice rules were read with the 86th rule.”

The court said that neither the identity of the small victim in WhatsApp nor the notification of sharing a copy of Mr. Singh through a news.

While the 74th of the law prohibits such explanations to the media, Kural 86 is concerned with the classification of crimes as cognitive or cognitive and determined courts.

The court said, “The defendant people, Swati Maliwal Jaihind and Bhupender Singh, were read by the 86th rule of the Children’s Justice Law.” He said.

The decision referred to the testimony of the witnesses and underlined the “complete failure” to prove the prosecution or the complainant’s charges.

On the allegations that the notification of the name of the minor was displayed by a news channel on July 25, 2016, the court said when the images of the news element were seen or did not explain the name of the anchor.

“Thus, the claims of prosecution seem to be unfounded and unfounded.”

In addition, he rejected the claim that the prosecution could be convicted by Mrs. Maliwal to Sho and revealed the name of the minors.

“The defendant 1 (Maliwal), the name of the small victim, otherwise all the details of the Burari Police Station who knows the criminal is not responsible for explaining, the Fir is not responsible for being responsible for filing the crime.” He said.

Meanwhile, the court, referring to the legislative intention behind the entry into force of the Law of the Law, said the aim was to “prevent a child’s trials from stamping and emotional trauma to insulating and protecting them.”

“Some measures such as limited access to the trial records, leakage and destruction of child criminals are accepted among the legislative organs in the world. Courts, to protect their identity, the laws of the laws of the law anonymizing,” he said.

Delhi police reserved Mrs. Maliwal in 2016 and said that the provisions of the Children’s Justice Law was a clear violation of the provisions of a small sexual crime sacrifice.

On July 23, 2016, the little girl succumbed to their injuries in a hospital after being sexually assaulted by her neighbor, who was allegedly forcing a abrasive substance in her throat and damaging her internal organs.

Due to the consent of the victim’s parents’ name, the IPC’s section 228a (prohibited for the disclosure of the identity of the victim) was left and the case was added to the 74th part of the Juvenile Justice Law.