IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established is that the Special Court, after disposing of a case, cannot alter or review its judgment to direct payment of compensation. The court clarified that the Special Court's power is limited to recommending compensation, and the quantification of compensation should be referred to the relevant authority.

JUDGMENT

1. Challenged in this petition under section 482 Cr.PC is the order dated 16.09.2019 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), East Khasi Hills District, Shillong in POCSO Case No. 51 of 2019 whereby the learned Special Judge on an application for grant of compensation on behalf of a victim of sexual assault, had granted compensation taking recourse to Rule 7(2) of the POCSO Rules, 2012, amounting to Rs. 2,00,000/- (rupees two lakhs) only.

2. Another similar matter relates to the order dated 11.11.2020 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO), Khliehriat, East Jaintia Hills District in Khliehriat Women PS Case No. 46(11)2019, under section 5 and 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 wherein the learned Special Court had directed for payment of compensation to the victim therein amounting to Rs. 4,00,000/- (rupees four lakhs) only.

3. Both matters being almost identical and similarly situated involving the issue of exercise of jurisdiction by the learned Special Court, it is deemed convenient and expedient to take up both the matters together and to pass a common order.

4. The factual background of the case in Crl. Petn. No. 7 of 2021 is that the victim who was a minor at the relevant time was sexually assaulted by one Yasin Warjri on 07.12.2017 resulting in an FIR being lodged and the victim being medically examined following due process, the matter culminated in a trial before the Special Court POCSO with POCSO Case No. 51 of 2019. During pendency of the trial, the accused expired on 01.08.2019 at NEIGRIHMS after prolonged illness, the death of which was confirmed by issuance of a Death Certificate dated 06.08.2019. The learned Special Judge on being informed of the said death of the accused, was pleased to deliver the final judgment in the matter, observing that the trial stands abated. The relevant date of the final order was 08.08.2019.

5. As pointed above, the learned Special Court on receipt of the said application for grant of compensation, has passed the impugned order dated 16.09.2019 exercising power under Rule 7(2) of the said POCSO Rules, 2012 and under Rule 7(5) has also directed the State Government to pay the award of compensation.

6. In the case of Theresa Pyrtuh, in Crl. Petn. No. 57 of 2021, the facts which emerged from the records would show that a minor victim girl was allegedly sexually assaulted by an unidentified accused person on 07.11.2019 for which an FIR dated 08.11.2019 was lodged leading to registration of Khliehriat Women PS Case No. 46(11) of 2019 under section 5 and 6 POCSO Act, 2012.

7. After investigation was launched, the Investigating Officer filed the final report vide FR No. 01/2020, dated 29.02.2020 stating that the accused person was untraceable despite the best efforts of the Investigating Authorities. The report was placed before the learned Special Court, who, vide order dated 11.11.2020, while acknowledging the said report, had disposed of the case. On the same day, after disposal of the said case, the learned Special Judge (POCSO) had directed the State Government to pay compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/- (four lakhs) only to the victim.

8. Being highly aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned orders dated 16.09.2019 and 11.11.2020 respectively, the petitioner/State has preferred this application with a prayer to quash the same.

9. Heard Mr. N.D. Chullai, learned AAG appearing for the petitioner/State who has submitted that in both the abovementioned cases, some pertinent legal query has arisen which is required to be brought to the notice of this Court and which queries are as follows: -

(i) Whether the learned Special Court after having disposed of the cases can pass the impugned order in view of the bar on section 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973?

(ii) Whether Rule 7(2) and (3) read with section 357A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 are mandatory to be followed? and

(iii) Whether the Special Court in awarding compensation under POCSO Act, 2012 can fix the quantum of compe