Hathras Crime : Supreme Court Dismisses UP Govt's Plea Challenging HC Direction To Give Job To Family Member Of Victim

The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a petition filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh challenging the Allahabad High Court's direction to consider giving job to a family member of the Hathras crime victim and to relocate the family from Hathras.

At the outset itself, the bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice PS Narasimha and Justice JB Pardiwala expressed surprise at the State coming in appeal against the High Court's order.

Additional Advocate General of UP Garima Prashad told the bench that the State is ready to relocate the family, but "they want Noida or Ghaziabad or Delhi". Whether the elder married brother could be regarded as a "dependent" of the victim was a question of law to be considered, the AAG added.

However, the bench said that it is not inclined to interfere considering the special facts and circumstances of the case.

"These are facilities provided to the family. We should not interfere. State should not come up in these matters", CJI DY Chandrachud told the AAG. 

"In the facts and circumstances of the present case, we are not inclined to entertain the special leave petition under Article 136 of the Constitution", the bench dictated the order.

When the AAG requested that the question of law be kept open, CJI pointed out that the order has specified that it is passed in the special facts and circumstances of the case.

What was the High Court direction?

The State filed the petition against the directions passed by a division bench of the High Court on July 26, 2022 in a suo motu case registered over the Hathras crime relating to the alleged murder and gang-rape of a Dalit girl. The Uttar Pradesh Government was directed to consider giving employment of one of the family members of the victim under the Government or Government Undertaking commensurate with the qualification possessed by them.

The High Court passed the order taking note of the socio-economic backwardness of the family and the rights granted by the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989. Analyzing Act 1989 and the Rules made thereunder, the Court came to a conclusion that the victim's family has a legal basis for its claim of relocation and job. The argument of the state that the provision of employment in such a case would violate Articles 14 and 16 is without any constitutional and legal basis was rejected.

The High Court also took into account the fact that the majority of the population in the village belongs to the upper castes and it is stated that the family is always targeted by other villagers and even after being under the security of CRPF whenever the family members go out, they are subjected to abuse and objectionable comments in the village. In this backdrop, the Court directed the State to relocate the family elsewhere within the state.

The case had received nationwide attention after the visuals of the police cremating the body of the victim in the middle of night, allegedly without the consent of the family, became viral. A PIL was filed in the Supreme Court seeking court-monitored investigation on account of the alleged lapses on the part of the State Police. Responding to the PIL, the UP Government later told the Court that it is agreeable to a CBI investigation and the matter was later handed over to the central agency. 

Three weeks ago, the trial court pronounced the verdict in the case, ruling out gangrape and acquitting three out of the four accused. One accused named Sandeep was convicted by the court for the offences of Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder under the Indian Penal Code (Section 304) and for offences under the SC-ST Act.

Case Title : State of UP vs R Father of Victim, Diary No. 6402-2023

Click here to read the order