Back
2018 Supreme(P&H) 1554
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.
Zile Singh and Others – Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and Others – Respondents
CWP No. 2763 of 2018
Decided On : 25-04-2018
For the Petitioners:Mr. Vivek Khatri, Advocate
Only victims, relatives, legal heirs, and legal guardians are entitled to compensation under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Headnote:
Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes - Monetary Relief - Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 - Rule 12(4) - Sections 297 and 447 of IPC - Section 2(ec) of the Act, 1989 - Article 366, Clauses 24 and 25
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, belonging to the Chamar Community, sought monetary relief under Rule 12(4) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, due to the denial of burial rights by another individual from the same village. The court was asked to quash the inaction of the respondent authorities in not granting the relief.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners, Zile Singh and Sheo Chand, were not entitled to compensation as they were not the legal heirs or relatives of the victims of the alleged offences under Sections 297 and 447 of IPC and Section 3 of the Act, 1989. The court dismissed the petition, stating that only the victims, relatives, legal heirs, and legal guardians are entitled to compensation.
Issues: Entitlement to monetary relief under Rule 12(4) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, and the definition of 'victim' under Section 2(ec) of the Act, 1989.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that only the victims, relatives, legal heirs, and legal guardians are entitled to compensation under the Act, and being villagers of the same village did not qualify the petitioners for compensation.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed as the court found it devoid of merit.
DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.
1. The prayer in the present petition is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release the monetary relief to the petitioners under Rule 12(4) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 (here-in-after referred to as the ‘Rules, 1995).
2. A further prayer has also been made for quashing the action/inaction of the respondent authorities in not granting the amount of compensation/monetary relief as per provisions of Rule 12(4) of the Rules, 1995.
3. As per case of the petitioners, they are stated to be the residents of Village Mangali Jhara, Tehsil and District Hisar and they belong to Chamar Community. The land measuring 02 acres in the said village was allotted to said community for burial of dead bodies of the children and the same was being used by them since the time of their forefathers. On 29.10.2016, when some persons of said community went for burial of dead body of newly born baby of Sandeep son of Santosh then Phool Singh son of Sheo Raj, caste Bishnoi, resident of the same village, did not allow the persons of that community to bury the dead body. Due to this, the dead body was buried at a distance of 03 kilometres away from the village. An application was moved to the respondent authorities but no action was taken. Again on 25.01.2017, some persons of said community went to bury the dead body of daughter of Sattyawan son of Giani Ram but they were not allowed to bury the dead body. The forcible possession has been taken over that land. Thereafter, FIR No.163 dated 23.02.2017 was registered under Sections 297 and 447 of IPC. Investigation of the case was conducted and the final report under Section 173 CR.P.C was submitted before the trial Court.
4. An application was moved by petitioners No.1 and 10 before respondent No.4 on 31.05.2017 for releasing of monetary relief under Rule 12(4) of the Rules, 1995 but no relief was granted to them.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per provisions of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (here-in-after referred to as 'the Act'), the petitioners are entitled for compensation but still their claim has not been considered and no compensation has been paid to them. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioners are entitled for monetary relief as provided under Rule 12(4) of Rules, 1995. It is not only a case of physical, mental, psychological, emotional or monetary harm but result of commission of any offence under this Act and the petitioners are entitled for compensation.
6. Heard arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners and have also perused the documents available on the file.
7. The 'victim' has been defined under Section 2(ec) of the Act, 1989, which is reproduced as under :-
“2. Definitions.-
XX XX XX XX
(ec) - 'victim' means any individual who falls within the definition of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes under clause © of sub-section (1) of Section 2 and who has suffered or experienced physical, mental, psychological, emotional or monetary harm or harm to his property as a result of the commission of any offence under this Act and includes his relatives, legal guardian and legal heirs.”
Section 2(c) of the Act is also relevant and is reproduced as under :-
“(c) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes shall have the meanings assigned to them respectively under clause (24) and clause (25) of Article 366 of the Constitution.”
Clauses 24 and 25 of Article 366 of the Constitution of India are also relevant, which are reproduced as under :-
“366. Definitions.- In this Constitution, unless the context otherwise requires, the following expressions have the meanings hereby respectively assigned to them, that is to say -
24. “Scheduled Castes” means such castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within such castes, races or tribes as are deemed under Article 341 to be Scheduled Castes for the purposes of this Co
