High Court of Judicature For Rajasthan · 2023

Aarti Dhobi Daughter of Shri Shibhu Dayal, aged about 22 years, resident of Gadh Bazar, Kishangarh Rainwal, Rainwal, District Jaipur (Raj.). ----Respondent/Petitioner For Appellant(s) : Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr. Saurabh Sharma, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA 24/04/2025 Order

1. This special appeal is filed by the State of Rajasthan and its Officers aggrieved by the direction issued by the writ Court on 31st March, 2023 to pay compensation to the victim in terms of Clause 44(ii) under Schedule Appended-II of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

2. Under Clause 44, a schedule of payment to the victims of gang rape has been provided, as under:- [2025:RJ-JP:17417-DB] (2 of 4) [SAW-710/2023] 25 per cent. When the charge sheet is sent 50 per cent. After medical examination and “(i) confirmatory medical report; (ii) to the Court; (iii) 25 per cent. On conclusion of trial by the lower court.”

3. The writ Court reflecting on the facts of the case made an observation that it would be really difficult to obtain conclusive medical evidence in cases of rape where the incident was not reported to the Police immediately after the occurrence. The writ Court further observed that denying compensation to the victim of rape in cases where charge-sheet has been filed by the Investigating Agency would be in breach of the statutory rules framed by the State. While making these observations, the writ Court allowed the writ petition in the following terms:- “11. In view of the aforesaid, this writ petition filed by the petitioner victim deserves to be allowed for the reasons; firstly the FIR, Charge- sheet as well as the order framing charges against the accused persons involves the offence under Section 376(D) of IPC; secondly the legislature considering the overall aspects in its wisdom has enacted this beneficial legislation at least to provide some financial aid to the victims of such serious offences; thirdly the denial of relief to the petitioner victim by the respondents is not sustainable under the facts and circumstances and this Court is of opinion that the petitioner victim should be awarded the financial aid of 75% in total, with the bifurcation of 50% & 25% of Rupees Eight Lakh and Twenty Five Thousand separately, in terms of Clause-(ii) of the Schedule annexed with the Rules of 1995 respectively. 12. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed. The recommendation/order dated 15.04.2021 is quashed and set aside. The petitioner victim is held entitled for payment of 75% of Rupees Eight Lakh and Twenty Five Thousand, both the two components of 50% & 25% to be computed separately on the aforesaid amount. Necessary exercise including payment shall be completed by the respondents within a period of two months.”

4. Assailing the directions contained in the order dated 31st March 2023, Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur, the learned Additional [2025:RJ-JP:17417-DB] (3 of 4) [SAW-710/2023] Advocate General draws attention of the Court to the medical report and the judgment in Sessions Case No. 240/2017 rendered by the Special Court at Jaipur.

5. After having perused the materials on record, we find that there had been inordinate delay on the part of the State authorities in making payment to the writ petitioner who was a victim of sexual crime. On 14th January 2017, a crime was registered under Sections 363, 366, 376 & 120-B of IPC and Section 3/4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 3(1)(w) & 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against Bhanwar Lal, Shankar Lal, Suresh Choudhary & Mukesh Kumar. On that day, the victim (hereinafter to be referred as ‘x’), was missing and when she was recovered she was sent for medical examination on 16th January, 2017. Thereafter, a charge- sheet was laid in the Court on 16th September, 2017. However, a part of compensation amounting to Rs. 2,50,000/- was paid to ‘x’ on 20th October, 2023. In the meantime the judgment in Sessions Case No. 240/2017 was already rendered by the Special Court at Jaipur.

6. Basing his arguments primarily on the medical examination report and the judgment in Sessions Case No.240/2017, Mr. Kapil Prakash Mathur, the learned Additional Advocate General contends that once it is found that ‘x’ was not subjected to the offence under Section 376-D of IPC, the State authorities were not required to make payment to ‘x’ as per Clause 44 or Schedule to the Rules of 1995. [2025:RJ-JP:17417-DB] (4 of 4) [SAW-710/2023]

7. In the first place, Clause 24 does not make a mention that only on recording a judgment of conviction compensation shall be paid to the victim of sexual offence. Secondly, being in the nature of compensatory legislation the benefits under the Rules of 1995 cannot be denied on technical grounds to the victims of sexual crime. We further find that there could not have been any substantial evidence as to commission of sexual offence when the victim was subjected to medical examination after a lapse of one month. Furthermore, acquittal of some of the accused persons giving them benefit of doubt shall not be a ground to disbelieve the version of occurrence given by the prosecutrix. In any event, nothing has been shown to this Court to disagree with the view taken by the writ Court which has issued a direction as aforesaid on 31st March, 2023 having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances in the case.

8. Therefore, we decline to interfere in this matter and, accordingly, D. B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.710/2023 is dismissed with a direction to the State authorities to make full and final payment to ‘x’ within a period of next six weeks as provided under Clause 44 of Schedule to the Rules of 1995.

9. All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANAND SHARMA),J (SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR),J DIVYA /62