Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 774 (GAU)

MD. SARAFAT ALI v. STATE OF ASSAM

2016-08-16

AJIT SINGH, N.CHAUDHURY

body2016
JUDGMENT : Ajit Singh, J. 1. This is an application under Section 357-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the applicant – Md. Sarafat Ali praying for compensation due to the death of his 22 years old son – Rafiqul Islam. 2. The petitioner has preferred this petition stating inter alia that his son Rafiqul Islam died on 26.9.2000 in Nagaon Civil Hospital. It is further stated that the Court of Sessions Judge, Nagaon, while passing the judgment and order dated 19.1.2016, convicting the accused/appellant under Section 302/34 of the Indian penal Code in Sessions (T-1) No. 49/2002, failed to grant compensation to the victim and as such, adequate compensation may be granted in terms of Government Notification No. PLA757/2010/123 dated 18.10.2012 issued by the Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam, Home and Political Department, Dispur, Guwahati as well as the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in Suresh vs. State of Haryana (2015) 2 SCC 227 . 3. In the said notification dated 18th October, 2012, the eligibility criteria for compensation have been specifically mentioned as follows:- “4. Eligibility for Compensation- The victim or his dependents satisfying the following criterion shall be eligible for grant of the compensation:- (1) Loss or injury sustained by the victim or his dependents should have caused substantial loss to the income of the family making it difficult to meet their both ends without the financial aid or has to spend beyond his means on medical treatment of mental/physical injury and a recommendation is made by the Court for compensation. (2) The victim/dependents report the crime to the Officer-in-Charge of Police Station or Judicial Magistrate of the area promptly, provided that the District Legal Services Authority, if satisfied, for the reasons to be recorded in writing, may condone the delay in reporting. (3) The victims/dependents co-operates with the police and prosecution during the investigation and trial of the case. (4) Where the perpetrator of the crime is not traceable or goes unpunished after trial, but the victim is identifiable and the victim has to be rehabilitated physically and mentally, such victim may also apply for grant of compensation under sub-section (4) of Section 357-A of the Act.” 4. (4) Where the perpetrator of the crime is not traceable or goes unpunished after trial, but the victim is identifiable and the victim has to be rehabilitated physically and mentally, such victim may also apply for grant of compensation under sub-section (4) of Section 357-A of the Act.” 4. The petitioner has hardly made any whisper that due to the death of his son, his family has suffered substantial loss to the income and it is difficult to meet their both ends without financial aid. It is also not the case of the petitioner that his son was the only source of income and due to his sudden death, his entire family has suffered immensely. The said stand was never taken before the trial court also. The petitioner never approached the District Legal Services Authority claiming for compensation. Although his son died in the year 2000, he has approached this court now after a gap of 16 years, which would go to show that the death of his son has not caused substantial loss of income to his family and as such, the petitioner’s case not being covered under the said notification is not liable to be entertained. Accordingly, the application is rejected.