A (Minor) vs State Through Standing Counsel

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

DELHI HIGH COURT
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
A (Minor) – Appellant
Versus
State Through Standing Counsel – Respondent

Table of Content
1. circumstances surrounding child victim's case. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments regarding interim compensation. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. analysis of compensation provisions and guidelines. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
4. court's decision on review of compensation request. (Para 15)
5. conclusion and order for reconsideration of application. (Para 16 , 17)

JUDGMENT

(VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING)

Manoj Kumar Ohri, J. (Oral)--The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the child victim `A', through her mother, assailing the order dated 24.04.2021 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-06, West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in FIR No. 394/2020 registered under Section 363 IPC at P.S. Mundka, Delhi, whereby the application moved on behalf of the child victim seeking grant of interim compensation was dismissed.

2. The present FIR came to be registered on a complaint given by the elder brother of the child victim, wherein it was stated that the child victim, who was aged about 12 years and 02 months, had gone missing and it was suspected that their neighbour had enticed her away. Subsequently, on 30.03.2021, the child victim was produced

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

DELHI HIGH COURTMANOJ KUMAR OHRIA (Minor) – AppellantVersusState Through Standing Counsel – Respondent

DELHI HIGH COURT
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
A (Minor) – Appellant
Versus
State Through Standing Counsel – Respondent