Distt.Orgnizer And Another v. Devki Bai

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Second Appeal No. 257 of 2008

1. District Organizer, Tribal Welfare Department.

2. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Collector, Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.

--- Appellants/Defendants

Versus

Devaki Bai, Aged 10 years, D/o Shri Bheem Dhurve, Caste Gond, R/o Near Railway Line, Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent/Plaintiff For Appellants/Defendants/State :

Mr. Ravi Bhagat, Deputy Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 28/08/2019

1. Heard on the question of admission and formulation of substantial question of law in this second appeal preferred by the defendants/State under Section 100 of the CPC.

2. Mr. Ravi Bhagat, learned deputy Government advocate would submit that first appellate Court is absolutely unjustified in granting compensation to the victim/plaintiff whose modesty has been said to be outraged by the accused, but which has been found established by the Criminal Court, as such, compensation of ₹ 50,000/- could not have been awarded to her, as the course available to the victim was to file an application under

Section 357 (3) or Section 357 A of the Cr.P.C. before the Criminal Court, therefore, it gives rise to substantial question of law for determination in this second appeal.

3. Plaintiff (juvenile) lodged a report stating that she has been subjected to rape by the accused person against whom offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 3 (1) (XII) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was registered by the jurisdictional police, Mahasamund and he was charge-sheeted before the juvenile Court, Raipur. Ultimately, on 27/10/1999, learned juvenile Court convicted the concerned accused for offence punishable under Section 354 of the IPC and imposed a fine of ₹ 5,000/- upon him, but that Court did not award any compensation to the plaintiff/victim as required under Section 357 (3) or Section 357 A of the Cr.P.C. Therefore, the plaintiff filed a civil suit for claiming compensation which was dismissed by the trial Court.

4. On appeal being preferred by the plaintiff, learned first appellate Court recorded a finding that plaintiff is a woman belonging to Scheduled Tribes and her modesty has been outraged by the accused person, therefore, she is entitled for compensation to the extent of ₹ 50,000/-. The said finding recorded by learned first appellate Court granting compensation to the extent of ₹ 50,000/- to the plaintiff, holding that she is a victim of offence under Section 354 of the IPC and therefore, is entitled for compensation, is a finding of fact based on evidence available on record, in which I do not find any perversity or illegality. Learned first appellate Court

has rightly exercised jurisdiction by granting compensation to the extent of ₹ 50,000/- to the plaintiff and it does not give rise to any substantial question for determination in this second appeal.

5. The second appeal deserves to be and is dismissed in limine without notice to the other side. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet