The Supreme court of India (20/01/2021), in the case of Ms. X vs The State of Jharkhand & Others comprising of three Judge Bench Justice ASHOK BHUSHAN, Justice R. SUBHASH REDDY, Justice M.R. SHAH hearing a writ petition u/A 32 of Constitution of India of a rape victim survivor in which the bench ruled that a rape victim survivor to be provided with an accommodation under PARDHAN MANTRI AWAS YOJNA or other state schemes.
Factual Background
The Petitioner is a rape victim of the Scheduled Caste category of the state of Jharkhand. After divorce from her first husband, Basant Yadav and the custody of son was given to Basant Yadav. She was raped by Mohd Ali & 3 others when she was going to meet her child.
FIR was lodged against the DY. Inspector General of Police, Mohd. Ali and three other accused.
Trial Court
The accused Mohd Ali was found guilty and was convicted with 10 years Rigorous Imprisonment.
Sessions Judge acquitted the Inspector General of Police by judgment and order dated 23.12.2017 against which criminal appeal has been filed in the High Court of Jharkhand. A criminal case was also lodged against the petitioner.
Issue before the Supreme Court
The petitioner’s case in the writ petition is that she being the rape victim, whose identity was disclosed by the media and after knowing that the petitioner is a rape victim, no one is ready to give her accommodation even on rent.
The petitioner in the present writ petition invoked jurisdiction of Supreme Court in the matter of rehabilitation of the petitioner. The petitioner also prays for direction to the respondent to protect the petitioner and her children’s life.
Petitioner Contentions
The Petitioner in its submissions submits before the Court that the:
- “The petitioner claims that the according to the directions of the supreme and the section 228A of the IPC the disclosure of the identity of victims of certain offences is punishable offence. For which the petitioner should be granted with a compensation as the life of the rape victim is difficult as they may feel discrimination from the society.”
- Due to the petitioner being rape victim she is not getting any help from family friends or society. She, with three children, has no means of survival and she is not able to give education to her children. The administration, media and society has compelled the petitioner to lead a life with no security, no job and no shelter in future.
Respondent Contentions
The Respondent submits before the Court that the
- “petitioner has also filled a case against the deputy inspector general of police in which he was acquitted and the case for false allegations was filled against the petitioner. The petitioner has filled total of seven cases against certain persons and officers , which shows that the petitioner is in a habit of making false allegations.”
- the State has taken care of making security arrangement of the petitioner and the education upto the age of 14 years in the State of Jharkhand is free which is provided by the State.
Court Analysis
The Supreme Court in its analysis stated that “There can be no denial that the petitioner is a rape victim. Even if we do not take into consideration other criminal cases filed by the petitioner under Section 376 IPC, in Case No.162/2002 where allegation of rape was made on 08.06.2002 the accused, Mohd. Ali has been convicted under Section 376(2)(g) IPC for 10 years RI. The petitioner being a rape victim deserves treatment as rape victim by all the authorities.”
Further, the Court stated that the A rape victim suffers not only a mental trauma but also discrimination from the society.
The Court considered the grant of compensation under the Jharkhand Victim Compensation Scheme, 2012 as amended in 2016.
Directions by the Court
The Supreme Court of India, issued some of the Directions the Deputy Commissioner, SSP, DLSA and other competent Authority Ranchi which are as follows:
- to take measure to ensure that minor children of the petitioner are provided free education in any of the Government Institutions in District Ranchi where the petitioner is residing till they attain the age of 14 years.
- providing house under Prime Minister Awas Yojna or any other Central or State Scheme in which petitioner could be provided accommodation.
- The Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi and other competent authority shall review the Police security provided to the petitioner from time to time and take such measures as deem fit and proper.
- The District Legal Services Authority, Ranchi on representation made by the petitioner shall render legal services to the petitioner as may be deemed fit to safeguard the interest of the petitioner.
Judgment
The Supreme Court of India disposed off the writ Petition.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Share this Document :Picture Source :
