<p>The Supreme Court on Monday issued a notice to the Government of Karnataka on a plea by the editor of a Kannada daily against rejection of his discharge plea in a case related to disclosure of the name of a child sexual assault victim.</p>.<p>A bench of Justices Indira Banerjee and J K Maheshwari sought a response from the state government on a petition filed by Gangadhar Narayan Nayak alias Gangadhar Hiregutti, editor of 'Karavali Munjavu' newspaper.</p>.<p>Senior advocate Devadatt Kamat and advocate Nishanth Patil, appearing for the petitioner, contended that Section 23 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act, prohibits publishing the name of the victim, is a non-cognisable offence and cannot be investigated without an order from the magistrate as mandated under Section 155 of the Criminal Procedure Code.</p>.<p>They challenged the validity of the high court's September 17 order which "erroneously" dismissed the petitioner's plea for discharge.</p>.<p>The counsel submitted the procedural safeguards with regard to the application of mind by the magistrate is necessary to ensure that people are not harassed needlessly.</p>.<p>An FIR was lodged on October 30, 2017, against the editor and reporter of the daily. Subsequently, a charge sheet was also filed against them in a court of Uttara Kannada (Karwar) under Section 23 of Pocso, carrying a maximum one-year jail term.</p>.<p><strong>Check out latest DH videos here</strong></p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Monday issued a notice to the Government of Karnataka on a plea by the editor of a Kannada daily against rejection of his discharge plea in a case related to disclosure of the name of a child sexual assault victim.</p>.<p>A bench of Justices Indira Banerjee and J K Maheshwari sought a response from the state government on a petition filed by Gangadhar Narayan Nayak alias Gangadhar Hiregutti, editor of 'Karavali Munjavu' newspaper.</p>.<p>Senior advocate Devadatt Kamat and advocate Nishanth Patil, appearing for the petitioner, contended that Section 23 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act, prohibits publishing the name of the victim, is a non-cognisable offence and cannot be investigated without an order from the magistrate as mandated under Section 155 of the Criminal Procedure Code.</p>.<p>They challenged the validity of the high court's September 17 order which "erroneously" dismissed the petitioner's plea for discharge.</p>.<p>The counsel submitted the procedural safeguards with regard to the application of mind by the magistrate is necessary to ensure that people are not harassed needlessly.</p>.<p>An FIR was lodged on October 30, 2017, against the editor and reporter of the daily. Subsequently, a charge sheet was also filed against them in a court of Uttara Kannada (Karwar) under Section 23 of Pocso, carrying a maximum one-year jail term.</p>.<p><strong>Check out latest DH videos here</strong></p>
