Punjab and Haryana High Court Orders Gurgaon DLSA To Pay Compensation To Minor Rape Victim Under 2013 Scheme

While allowing the writ petition filed by the father of the victim - who was minor on the date of incident, the single judge bench of Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj observed that the incident took place in the year 2014 and the judgment was passed by the trial court in 2015 when the 2013 Scheme was in force.

The bench said the ascertainment of compensation was to be done by the Court, which did not take place.

“The victim cannot be denied benefit of more benevolent scheme merely due to an act of oversight by the Court. The Act of Court should not prejudice her claim to just compensation. She cannot be now deprived of her compensation merely because the said aspect could not be brought up at the time when trial was concluded,” said the court. 

It further said that the victim was a minor on the date of the incident and when the matter was decided. “The Court is the supreme guardian of her best interests as parens patriae. Thus, the obligation was cast on the Court to perfect her best interest,” the court added.

It was the case of the petitioner that his old minor daughter was subjected to aggravated penetrative sexual assault by the accused persons on August 11, 2014. The trial court convicted the accused persons under section 376 (Punishment for Rape) and section 6 (Punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of the POCSO Act, 2012 and sentenced the accused to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-.

However, the court did not forward the case of the victim to the DLSA for grant of compensation under the scheme of 2013 and also there was no compensation awarded to the victim under section 357A of CrPC.

Subsequently, an application for seeking grant of compensation under the State Compensation Scheme was filed by the petitioner which was allowed vide order dated October 31, 2022 and an amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- was awarded by the POCSO Court as a compensation under the Haryana Victim Compensation Scheme of 2020 and the same was released in favour of the petitioner on January 18, 2023.

However, the petitioner approached the High Court contending that the victim was entitled to a compensation of Rs. 4,50,000/- under the repealed Scheme of 2013 as the same was in force at the time of occurrence of incident and pronouncement of judgement by the trial court.

“It is evident from a perusal of the above that for a victim to be eligible, she is required to fulfill the eligibility condition under Clause 4 of the Scheme of 2013. It is not in dispute that compensation under Section 357-A has not been awarded by the POCSO Act by the Court and it has held that the minimum compensation payable is Rs.4,00,000/-. Hence, the daughter of the petitioner fulfills all the requirements prescribed under the Scheme,” Justice Bhardwaj said.

The court further said that considering the design objective of the scheme which is compensatory in nature for the wrong done to a person, directing the petitioner to file a fresh petition for the balance amount of Rs.50,000/- would only add to his miseries.

“Hence, considering the larger interest of justice in mind, the Court is inclined to exercise its power of issuing the prerogative writ to meet the ends of justice.”, it added.

The court also held that sending the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy of appeal would be futile as the authorities under the scheme of 2013 cannot award compensation under a repealed scheme.

Accordingly, the court allowed the petition and directed the DLSA to a total compensation of Rs. 4,50,000/- lakhs as per the Haryana Victim Compensation Scheme, 2013. As the amount of Rs.4,00,000/- was already disbursed, the court directed to release the remaining amount of Rs. 50,000/- in favour of petitioner within four weeks.

Advocate Sushil Bhardwaj represented the petitioner.

Additional Advocate General Vivek Chauhan represented State of Haryana 

Senior Advocate Sumeet Goel with Advocate A.S. Balwan represented the DLSA.

Case Title: B v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (PH) 38

Click Here to Read/Download Judgment