Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
Hon’ble Karnataka High Court dismissed a petition in a recent Judgement of (XXX represented by Adv Pushpakantha v. The Member Secretary, Karnataka State Legal Service Authority) Writ Petition No. 24462 of 2019 on 16th September 2019 of a rape survivor. Petitioner inter alia seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing of the communication dated 23/05/2019, for rejection of her victim compensation by the authority under the Victim Compensation Scheme (VCS). Writ of mandamus is also filed before the court to direct the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority to release an amount of compensation of Rs.7 Lakhs.
In the petition, it is stated that the petitioner is a rape victim and the incident took place on 11/03/2014. On petitioner's complaint, the First Information Report was lodged and after the completion of the investigation, the police filed a charge sheet against the accused persons. On 22/05/2015, the father of the petitioner claimed a grant of compensation under the Victim Compensation Scheme before the District Legal Services Authority. The Authority passed an award on 24/03/2018, by which the petitioner was directed to recieve a sum of Rs.3 Lakhs as compensation.
However, during the trial, the petitioner and her father were declared hostile. Thereupon, the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority by an order dated 23/05/2019 set aside the order for compensation passed by the Authority on the ground that the petitioner during the investigation had turned hostile.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is entitled to compensation even if the victim is declared hostile and the accused is acquitted. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent drew the attention of this court to para 6(3) of the scheme and also submitted that the victim is under an obligation to cooperate with the police and the prosecution during the investigation and trial of the case and since, the petitioner was declared hostile, therefore, State Legal Services Authority has rightly recalled the order granting compensation.
Hon’ble Karnataka High Court considered the submissions of the respondent and said that the petitioner has violated clause 6(3) of the scheme, therefore she is not entitled to the compensation. The order passed by the State Legal Services Authority appears to have been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. However, in the peculiar factual situations of the case, the principles of natural justice have no application. It is well settled in law that principles of natural justice do not apply to a case where on admitted facts only one conclusion is possible. Court referred to the case of S.L.Kapoor V. Jagmohan & Others[1].
[1] AIR 1981 SC 136
86540
103860
630
114
59824