Technical Objections Like Limitation Can't Stand In Way Of Victim Compensation: Punjab & Haryana HC Orders Compensation To Gang Rape Victim

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has made it clear that technical objections like limitation in filing the application for victim compensation should not stand in a way of the social welfare object sought to be served by the Victim Compensation Scheme.

While allowing the plea for compensation of a gang rape victim, Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj said, "the scheme being benevolent and intended to rehabilitate and compensate a victim of atrocity, such technical objection as regards the claim having been submitted delayed in point of time should not stand in the way of the social welfare object sought to be served by the said scheme."

These observation came in response to the plea of a gang-rape victim seeking compensation as per Punjab Victim or their Dependents Compensation Scheme, 2011.

It was submitted that no compensation has been awarded to her even while convicting the accused persons in exercise of powers under Section 357-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The Amicus Curiae submitted that the FIR of the gang-rape against the accused persons was filed only after the intervention of Punjab State Human Rights Commission and after the trial the accused persons were convicted in 2014 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years, a fine of Rs.10,000 each was also imposed on them.

However, at the time of passing of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the compensation in terms of Section 357-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, was not awarded. The petitioner thereafter moved an application to the respondent Authorities under the Punjab Victim or their Dependents Compensation Scheme, 2011, the said application for compensation had been denied as the application was moved after a delay of six months, the Court was told.

The counsel for the State contended that the application having been submitted beyond the limitation of six months from the date of occurrence, hence, the claim of the petitioner was declined.

He further submitted that the application was also declined because there was no such recommendation to grant compensation in favour of the petitioner by the trial Court while convicting and sentencing the accused. 

Considering the submissions, the Court remarked that "Surprisingly" defence is taken by the State, that the application for compensation cannot be accepted because there was a delay of 06 months.

"There may very well be a possibility that the victim was awaiting award of compensation under Section 357-A Cr.P.C. by the trial Court and the occasion to approach this Court arose only after no such compensation was awarded by the trial Court at the stage of convicting the private respondents/accused persons," the Court observed.

It added further that the scheme being benevolent and intended to rehabilitate and compensate a victim of atrocity, such technical objection as regards the claim having been submitted delayed in point of time should not stand in the way of the social welfare object sought to be served by it,

Consequently, the plea was allowed and the Court directed to the release the compensation in terms of the Punjab Victim or their Dependents Compensation Scheme, 2011, as it was in force then within a period of 06 weeks after the receipt of certified copy of the order.

Appearance: Divya Sharma, Advocate, (Amicus Curiae) for the petitioner.

Sehajbir Singh Aulakh, AAG, Punjab.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 20

Case Title: X v. State of Punjab & Ors