LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

SC: State is duty bound to protect the Fundamental Rights of its citizens

Vineet Kumar ,
  28 March 2014       Share Bookmark

Court :
Supreme Court of India
Brief :
The bench comprising of Chief Justice of India, P. Sathasivam, Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde and Justice N.V. Ramana directed the West Bengal government to pay Rs. 5 lakh compensation in addition to already sanctioned Rs. 50,000 to the gang rape victim within one month. The bench also stated that: ''State is duty bound to protect the Fundamental Rights of its citizens; and an inherent aspect of Article 21 of the Constitution would be the freedom of choice in marriage. Such offences are resultant of the States incapacity or inability to protect the Fundamental Rights of its citizens...''
Citation :
Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. and Ors., (2006) 5 SCC 475 Arumugam Servai vs. State of Tamilnadu, (2011) 6 SCC 405 Shakti Vahini vs. Union of India and Others in W.P. (C) No. 231 of 2010 State of Rajasthan vs. Sanyam, Lodha, (2011) 13 SCC 262 Bodhisattwa Gautam vs. Miss Subhra Chakraborty, (1996) 1 SCC 490 Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum vs. Union of India and others P. Rathinam vs. State of Gujarat, (1994) SCC (Crl) 1163 Railway Board vs. Chandrima Das, (2000) 2 SCC 465 Satya Pal Anand vs. State of M.P. The State vs. Md. Moinul Haque and Ors. (2001) 21 BLD 465 Lalita Kumari vs. Govt. of U.P & Ors 2013 (13) SCALE 559











In Re: Indian Woman says gang-raped on orders of Village

Court published in Business & Financial News dated







P.Sathasivam, CJI.

1) This Court, based on the news item published in the 

Business and Financial News dated 23.01.2014 relating to the 

gang-rape of a 20 year old woman of Subalpur Village, P.S. 

Labpur, District Birbhum, State of West Bengal on the 

intervening night of 20/21.01.2014 on the orders of 

community panchayat as punishment for having relationship 

with a man from a different community, by order dated 

24.01.2014, took suo motu action and directed the District 

Judge, Birbhum District, West Bengal to inspect the place of 


occurrence and submit a report to this Court within a period 

of one week from that date. 

2) Pursuant to the direction dated 24.01.2014, the District 

Judge, Birbhum District, West Bengal along with the Chief 

Judicial Magistrate inspected the place in question and 

submitted a Report to this Court.  However, this Court, on 

31.01.2014, after noticing that there was no information in the 

Report as to the steps taken by the police against the persons 

concerned, directed the Chief Secretary, West Bengal to 

submit a detailed report in this regard within a period of two 

weeks.  On the same day, Mr. Sidharth Luthra, learned 

Additional Solicitor General was requested to assist the Court 

as amicus in the matter. 

3) Pursuant to the aforesaid direction, the Chief Secretary 

submitted a detailed report dated 10.02.2014 and the copies of 

the same were provided to the parties. On 14.02.2014, this 

Court directed the State to place on record the First 

Information Report (FIR), Case Diaries, Result of the 

investigation/Police Report under Section 173 of the Code of 


Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short ‘the Code’), statements 

recorded under Section 161 of the Code, Forensic Opinion, 

Report of vaginal swab/other medical tests etc., conducted on 

the victim on the next date of hearing.  

4) After having gathered all the requisite material, on 

13.03.2014, we heard learned amicus as well as Mr. Anip 

Sachthey, learned counsel for the State of West Bengal 

extensively and reserved the matter.   


5) Mr. Sidharth Luthra, learned amicus having perused and 

scrutinized all the materials on record in his submissions had  

highlighted three aspects viz. (i) issues concerning the 

investigation; (ii) prevention of recurring of such crimes; and 

(iii) Victim compensation; and invited this Court to consider 

the same.  

Issues concerning the investigation:            

6) Certain relevant issues pertaining to investigation were 

raised by learned amicus. Primarily, Mr. Luthra stated that 


although the FIR has been scribed by one Anirban Mondal, a 

resident of Labpur, Birbhum District, West Bengal, there is no 

basis as to how Anirban Mondal came to the Police Station 

and there is also no justification for his presence there. 

Further, he stressed on the point that Section 154 of the Code 

requires such FIR to be recorded by a woman police officer or a 

woman officer and, in addition, as per the latest amendment 

dated 03.02.2013, a woman officer should record the 

statements under Section 161 of the Code. While highlighting 

the relevant provisions, he also submitted that there was no 

occasion for Deputy Superintendent of Police to re-record the 

statements on 26.01.2014, 27.01.2014 and 29.01.2014 and 

that too in gist which would lead to possible contradictions 

being derived during cross-examinations.  He also drew our 

attention to the statement of the victim under Section 164 of 

the Code.  He pointed out that mobile details have not been 

obtained. He also brought to our notice that if the Salishi 

(meeting) is relatable to a village, then the presence of persons 

of neighbouring villages i.e., Bikramur and Rajarampur is not 


explained.  Moreover, he submitted that there is variance in 

the version of the FIR and the Report of the Judicial Officer as 

to the holding of the meeting (Salishi) on the point whether it 

was held in the night of 20.01.2014 as per the FIR or the next 

morning as per the Judicial Officer’s report, which is one of 

the pertinent issues to be looked into. He also submitted that 

the offence of extortion under Section 385 of the Indian Penal 

Code, 1860 (in short ‘the IPC’) and related offences have not 

been invoked.  Similarly, offence of criminal intimidation 

under Section 506 IPC and grievous hurt under Section 325 

IPC have not been invoked.  Furthermore, Sections 354A and 

354B ought to have been considered by the investigating 

agency. He further pointed out the discrepancy in the name of 

accused Ram Soren mentioned in the FIR and in the Report of 

the Judicial Officer which refers to Bhayek Soren which needs 

to be explained.  He also submitted that the electronic 

documents (e-mail) need to be duly certified under Section 65A 

of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.  Finally, he pointed out that 


the aspect as to whether there was a larger conspiracy must 

also be seen.   

7) Mr. Anip Sachthey, learned counsel for the State assured 

this Court that the deficiency, if any, in the investigation, as 

suggested by learned amicus, would be looked into and 

rectified.  The above statement is hereby recorded.  

Prevention of recurring of such crimes: 

8)  Violence against women is a recurring crime across the 

globe and India is no exception in this regard. The case at 

hand is the epitome of aggression against a woman and it is 

shocking that even with rapid modernization such crime 

persists in our society. Keeping in view this dreadful increase 

in crime against women, the Code of Criminal Procedure has 

been specifically amended by recent amendment dated 

03.02.2013 in order to advance the safeguards for women in 

such circumstances which are as under:- 

“154. Information in cognizable cases.—

(1) x x x 


Provided that if the information is given by the woman

against whom an offence under Section 326A, Section 326B,

Section 354, Section 354A, Section 354B, Section 354C,

Section 354D, Section 376, Section 376A, Section 376B,

Section 376C, Section 376D, Section 376E, or Section 509 of

the Indian Penal Code is alleged to have been committed or

attempted, then such information shall be recorded, by a

woman police officer or any woman officer: 

Provided further that:-- 

(a) in the event that the person against whom an offence 

under Section 354, Section 354A, Section 354B, Section

354C, Section 354D, Section 376, Section 376A, Section

376B, Section 376C, Section 376D, Section 376E, or Section

509 of the Indian Penal Code is alleged to have been

committed or attempted, is temporarily or permanently

mentally or physically disabled, then such information shall

be recorded by a police officer, at the residence of the

person seeking to report such offence or at a convenient

place of such person’s choice, in the presence of an

interpreter or a special educator, as the case may be; 

(2) x x x

(3) x x x”

“161.—Examination of witnesses by police:-

(1) x x x

(2) x x x 

(3) x x x 

Provided further that the statement of a woman against

whom an offence under Section 354, Section 354A, Section

354B, Section 354C, Section 354D, Section 376, Section

376A, Section 376B, Section 376C, Section 376D, Section

376E, or Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code is alleged to

have been committed or attempted shall be recorded, by a

woman police officer or any woman officer.” 

 “164.—Recording of confessions and statements.—

5A In cases punishable under Section 354, Section 354A, 

Section 354B, Section 354C, Section 354D, sub-Section (1) 


or sub-Section (2) of Section 376, Section 376A, Section

376B, Section 376C, Section 376D, Section 376E, or Section

509 of the Indian Penal Code, the Judicial Magistrate shall

record the statement of the person against whom such

offence has been committed in the manner prescribed in

sub-Section (5), as soon as the commission of the offence is

brought to the notice of the police:”  


“164 A. Medical examination of the victim of rape.- (1)

Where, during the stage when an offence of committing rape

or attempt to commit rape is under investigation, it is

proposed to get the person of the woman with whom rape is

alleged or attempted to have been committed or attempted, 

examined by a medical expert, such examination shall be 

conducted by a registered medical practitioner employed in a

hospital run by the Government or a local authority and in

the absence of such a practitioner, by any other registered

medical practitioner, with the consent of such woman or of a

person competent to give such consent on her behalf and

such woman shall be sent to such registered medical

practitioner within twenty-four hours from the time of

receiving the information relating to the commission of such



(2) The registered medical practitioner, to whom such woman

is sent shall, without delay, examine her person and prepare

a report of his examination giving the following particulars,


(i) the name and address of the woman and of the person by

whom she was brought; 

(ii) the age of the woman;  

(iii) the description of material taken from the person of the 

woman for DNA profiling; 

(iv) marks of injury, if any, on the person of the woman; (v)

general mental condition of the woman; and (vi) other

material particulars in reasonable detail, 

(3) The report shall state precisely the reasons for each

conclusion arrived at. 

(4) The report shall specifically record that the consent of the

woman or of the person competent, to give such consent on

her behalf to such examination had been obtained. 

(5) The exact time of commencement and completion of the

examination shall also be noted in the report.  


(6) The registered medical practitioner shall, without delay

forward the report to the investigating officer who shall

forward it to the Magistrate referred to in section 173 as part

of the documents referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (5)

of that section. 

(7) Nothing in this section shall be construed as rendering

lawful any examination without the consent of the woman or

of any person competent to give such consent on her behalf. 

Explanation--For the purposes of this section, "examination"

and "registered medical practitioner" shall have the same

meanings as in section 53.” 

9) The courts and the police officialss are required to be 

vigilant in upholding these rights of the victims of crime as the 

effective implementation of these provisions lies in their hands. 

In fact, the recurrence of such crimes has been taken note of 

by this Court in few instances and seriously condemned in the 

ensuing manner.  

10) In Lata Singh vs. State of U.P. and Ors., (2006) 5 SCC 

475, this Court, in paras 17 and 18, held as under:  

“17. The caste system is a curse on the nation and the 

sooner it is destroyed the better. In fact, it is dividing the 

nation at a time when we have to be united to face the

challenges before the nation unitedly. Hence, inter-caste

marriages are in fact in the national interest as they will

result in destroying the caste system. However, disturbing

news are coming from several parts of the country that

young men and women who undergo inter-caste marriage,

are threatened with violence, or violence is actually

committed on them. In our opinion, such acts of violence or

threats or harassment are wholly illegal and those who

commit them must be severely punished. This is a free and

democratic country, and once a person becomes a major he 


or she can marry whosoever he/she likes. If the parents of

the boy or girl do not approve of such inter-caste or interreligious

marriage the maximum they can do is that they can


social relations with the son or the daughter, but they


give threats or commit or instigate acts of violence


cannot harass the person who undergoes such intercaste

or inter-religious marriage. We, therefore, direct that


administration/police authorities throughout the country


see to it that if any boy or girl who is a major undergoes


or inter-religious marriage with a woman or man


is a major, the couple is not harassed by anyone nor


to threats or acts of violence, and anyone who


such threats or harasses or commits acts of violence


himself or at his instigation, is taken to task by 

instituting criminal proceedings by the police against such 

persons and further stern action is taken against such

persons as provided by law. 


18. We sometimes hear of “honour” killings of such persons 

who undergo inter-caste or inter-religious marriage of their

own free will. There is nothing honourable in such killings,

and in fact they are nothing but barbaric and shameful acts

of murder committed by brutal, feudal-minded persons who

deserve harsh punishment. Only in this way can we stamp

out such acts of barbarism.” 

11) In Arumugam Servai vs. State of Tamilnadu, (2011) 6 

SCC 405, this Court, in paras 12 and 13, observed as under:- 


“12. We have in recent years heard of “Khap Panchayats” 

(known as “Katta Panchayats” in Tamil Nadu) which often

decree or encourage honour killings or other atrocities in an

institutionalised way on boys and girls of different castes

and religion, who wish to get married or have been married,

or interfere with the personal lives of people. We are of the

opinion that this is wholly illegal and has to be ruthlessly

stamped out. As already stated in Lata Singh case, there is

nothing honourable in honour killing or other atrocities and,

in fact, it is nothing but barbaric and shameful murder.

Other atrocities in respect of personal lives of people

committed by brutal, feudal-minded persons deserve harsh

punishment. Only in this way can we stamp out such acts of 



barbarism and feudal mentality. Moreover, these acts take

the law into their own hands, and amount to kangaroo

courts, which are wholly illegal. 


13. Hence, we direct the administrative and police officials to 

take strong measures to prevent such atrocious acts. If any

such incidents happen, apart from instituting criminal

proceedings against those responsible for such atrocities, the

State Government is directed to immediately suspend the

District Magistrate/Collector and SSP/SPs of the district as

well as other officials concerned and charge-sheet them and

proceed against them departmentally if they do not (1)

prevent the incident if it has not already occurred but they

have knowledge of it in advance, or (2) if it has occurred, 

they do not promptly apprehend the culprits and others 

involved and institute criminal proceedings against them, as

in our opinion they will be deemed to be directly or indirectly

accountable in this connection.” 

12) Likewise, the Law Commission of India, in its 242

Report on Prevention of Interference with the Freedom of 

Matrimonial Alliances (in the name of Honour and Tradition) 

had suggested that: 


“11.1 In order to keep a check on the high-handed and

unwarranted interference by the caste assemblies or

panchayats with sagotra, inter-caste or inter-religious

marriages, which are otherwise lawful, this legislation has

been proposed so as to prevent the acts endangering the

liberty of the couple married or intending to marry and their

family members. It is considered necessary that there should

be a threshold bar against the congregation or assembly for

the purpose of disapproving such marriage / intended

marriage and the conduct of the young couple. The members

gathering for such purpose, i.e., for condemning the

marriage with a view to take necessary consequential action,

are to be treated as members of unlawful assembly for which

a mandatory minimum punishment has been prescribed. 





11.2 So also the acts of endangerment of liberty including

social boycott, harassment, etc. of the couple or their family

members are treated as offences punishable with mandatory

minimum sentence. The acts of criminal intimidation by

members of unlawful assembly or others acting at their

instance or otherwise are also made punishable with

mandatory minimum sentence. 


11.3 A presumption that a person participating in an

unlawful assembly shall be presumed to have also intended

to commit or abet the commission of offences under the

proposed Bill is provided for in Section 6. 


11.4 Power to prohibit the unlawful assemblies and to take 

preventive measures are conferred on the Sub-Divisional / 

District Magistrate. Further, a SDM/DM is enjoined to

receive a request or information from any person seeking

protection from the assembly of persons or members of any

family who are likely to or who have been objecting to the

lawful marriage. 


11.5 The provisions of this proposed Bill are without

prejudice to the provisions of Indian Penal Code. Care has

been taken, as far as possible, to see that there is no

overlapping with the provisions of the general penal law. In

other words, the criminal acts other than those specifically

falling under the proposed Bill are punishable under the

general penal law.  


11.6 The offence will be tried by a Court of Session in the

district and the offences are cognizable, non-bailable and




11.7 Accordingly, the Prohibition of Interference with the

Freedom of Matrimonial Alliances Bill 20 has been prepared

in order to effectively check the existing social malady.” 

13) It is further pertinent to mention that the issue relating 

to the role of Khap Panchayats is pending before this Court in 

Shakti Vahini vs. Union of India and Others in W.P. (C) No. 

231 of 2010.  



14) Ultimately, the question which ought to consider and 

assess by this Court is whether the State Police Machinery 

could have possibly prevented the said occurrence. The 

response is certainly a ‘yes’. The State is duty bound to protect 

the Fundamental Rights of its citizens; and an inherent aspect 

of Article 21 of the Constitution would be the freedom of choice 

in marriage.  Such offences are resultant of the States 

incapacity or inability to protect the Fundamental Rights of its 


15) In a report by the Commission of Inquiry, headed by a 

former Judge of the Delhi High Court Justice Usha Mehra 

(Retd.), (at pg. 86), it was seen (although in the context of the 

NCR) that police officers seldom visit villages; it was suggested 

that a Police Officer must visit a village on every alternate days 

to “instill a sense of security and confidence amongst the 

citizens of the society and to check the depredations of 

criminal elements.” 

16) As a long-term measure to curb such crimes, a larger 

societal change is required via education and awareness.  



Government will have to formulate and implement policies in 

order to uplift the socio-economic condition of women, 

sensitization of the Police and other concerned parties towards 

the need for gender equality and it must be done with focus in 

areas where statistically there is higher percentage of crimes 

against women.  

Victim Compensation: 

17) No compensation can be adequate nor can it be of any 

respite for the victim but as the State has failed in protecting 

such serious violation of a victim’s fundamental right, the 

State is duty bound to provide compensation, which may help 

in the victim’s rehabilitation. The humiliation or the reputation 

that is snuffed out cannot be recompensed but then monetary 

compensation will at least provide some solace. 

18) In 2009, a new Section 357A was introduced in the Code 

which casts a responsibility on the State Governments to 

formulate Schemes for compensation to the victims of crime in 

coordination with the Central Government whereas, 



previously, Section 357 ruled the field which was not 

mandatory in nature and only the offender can be directed to 

pay compensation to the victim under this Section.  Under the 

new Section 357A, the onus is put on the District Legal Service 

Authority or State Legal Service Authority to determine the 

quantum of compensation in each case. However, no rigid 

formula can be evolved as to have a uniform amount, it should 

vary in facts and circumstances of each case.  In the case of 

State of Rajasthan vs. Sanyam, Lodha, (2011) 13 SCC 262, 

this Court held that the failure to grant uniform ex-gratia relief 

is not arbitrary or unconstitutional.  It was held that the 

quantum may depend on facts of each case.  

19) Learned amicus also advocated for awarding interim 

compensation to the victim by relying upon judicial 

precedents. The concept of the payment of interim 

compensation has been recognized by this Court in 

Bodhisattwa Gautam vs. Miss Subhra Chakraborty, (1996) 

1 SCC 490.  It referred to Delhi Domestic Working Women’s 

Forum vs. Union of India and others to reiterate the 



centrality of compensation as a remedial measure in case of 

rape victims. It was observed as under:-  

“If the Court trying an offence of rape has jurisdiction to

award the compensation at the final stage, there is no reason

to deny to the Court the right to award interim compensation

which should also be provided in the Scheme.” 

20) This Court, in P. Rathinam vs. State of Gujarat, (1994) 

SCC (Crl) 1163, which pertained to rape of a tribal woman in 

police custody awarded an interim compensation of Rs. 

50,000/- to be paid by the State Government. Likewise, this 

Court, in Railway Board vs. Chandrima Das, (2000) 2 SCC 

465, upheld the High Court’s direction to pay Rs. 10 lacs as 

compensation to the victim, who was a Bangladeshi National.  

Further, this Court in SLP (Crl.) No. 5019/2012 titled as 

Satya Pal Anand vs. State of M.P., vide order dated 

05.08.2013, enhanced the interim relief granted by the State 

Government from Rs. 2 lacs to 10 lacs each to two girl victims.   

21) The Supreme Court of Bangladesh in The State vs. Md. 

Moinul Haque and Ors. (2001) 21 BLD 465 has interestingly 

observed that “victims of rape should be compensated by 

giving them half of the property of the rapist(s) as 



compensation in order to rehabilitate them in the society.” If 

not adopting this liberal reasoning, we should at least be in a 

position to provide substantial compensation to the victims.  

22) Nevertheless, the obligation of the State does not 

extinguish on payment of compensation, rehabilitation of 

victim is also of paramount importance.  The mental trauma 

that the victim suffers due to the commission of such heinous 

crime, rehabilitation becomes a must in each and every case. 

Mr. Anip Sachthey, learned counsel for the State submitted a 

report by Mr. Sanjay Mitra, Chief Secretary, dated 11.03.2014 

on the rehabilitation measures rendered to the victim.  The 

report is as follows:-  



Report on the Rehabilitation Measures

Reference: Suo Motu Writ Petition No. 24 of 2014

Subject: PS Labpur, District Birbhum, West Bengal Case No. 

14/2014 dated 22.01.2014 under section 376D/341/506


In compliance with the order passed by the Hon’ble

Supreme Court during the hearing of the aforesaid case on


 March, 2014, the undersigned has reviewed the progress

of rehabilitation measures taken by the State Government 




agencies.  The progress in the matter is placed hereunder for

kind perusal.  

1. A Government Order has been issued sanctioning an

amount of Rs.50,000/- to the victim under the Victim

Compensation Scheme of the State Government.  It is

assured that the amount will be drawn and disbursed

to the victim within a week.  

2. Adequate legal aid has been provided to the victim. 

3. ‘Patta’ in respect of allotment of a plot of land under ‘Nijo 

Griha Nijo Bhumi Scheme’ of the State Government

has been issued in favour of the mother of the victim. 

4. Construction of residential house out of the fund under 

the scheme ‘Amar Thikana’ in favour of the mother of

victim has been completed.  

5. Widow pension for the months of January, February and

March, 2014 has been disbursed to the mother of the


6. Installation of a tube well near the residential house of

the mother of the victim has been completed.  

7. Construction of sanitary latrine under TSC Fund has

been completed.  

8. The victim has been enrolled under the Social Security

Scheme for Construction Worker.  

9. Antyodaya Anna Yojna Card has been issued in favour of

the victim and her mother.  

10. Relief and Government relief articles have been

provided to the victim and her family. 

The State Government has taken all possible

administrative action to provide necessary assistance to

the victim which would help her in rehabilitation and



     (Sanjay Mitra) 

Chief Secretary” 



23) The report of the Chief Secretary indicates the steps 

taken by the State Government including the compensation 

awarded. Nevertheless, considering the facts and 

circumstances of this case, we are of the view that the victim 

should be given a compensation of at least Rs. 5 lakhs for 

rehabilitation by the State. We, accordingly, direct the 

Respondent No. 1 (State of West Bengal through Chief 

Secretary) to make a payment of Rs. 5 lakhs, in addition to the 

already sanctioned amount of Rs. 50,000, within one month 

from today.  Besides, we also have some reservation 

regarding the benefits being given in the name of mother of the 

victim, when the victim herself is a major (i.e. aged about 20 

years). Thus, in our considered view, it would be appropriate 

and beneficial to the victim if the compensation and other 

benefits are directly given to her and accordingly we order so. 

24) Further, we also wish to clarify that according to Section 

357B, the compensation payable by the State Government 

under Section 357A shall be in addition to the payment of fine 

to the victim under Section 326A or Section 376D of the IPC.  



25) Also, no details have been given as to the measures taken 

for security and safety of the victim and her family.  Merely 

providing interim measure for their stay may protect them for 

the time being but long term rehabilitation is needed as they 

are all material witnesses and likely to be socially ostracized. 

Consequently, we direct the Circle Officer of the area to 

inspect the victim’s place on day-to-day basis.




26) The crimes, as noted above, are not only in contravention 

of domestic laws, but are also a direct breach of the 

obligations under the International law. India has ratified 

various international conventions and treaties, which oblige 

the protection of women from any kind of discrimination. 

However, women of all classes are still suffering from 

discrimination even in this contemporary society. It will be 

wrong to blame only on the attitude of the people. Such crimes 

can certainly be prevented if the state police machinery work 



in a more organized and dedicated manner. Thus, we implore 

upon the State machinery to work in harmony with each other 

to safeguard the rights of women in our country. As per the 

law enunciated in Lalita Kumari vs. Govt. of U.P & Ors 

2013 (13) SCALE 559, registration of FIR is mandatory under 

Section 154 of the Code, if the information discloses 

commission of a cognizable offence and the Police officers are 

duty bound to register the same.  

27) Likewise, all hospitals, public or private, whether run by 

the Central Government, the State Government, local bodies or 

any other person, are statutorily obligated under Section 357C 

to provide the first-aid or medical treatment, free of cost, to the 

victims of any offence covered under Sections 326A, 376, 

376A, 376B, 376C, 376D or Section 376E of the IPC. 

28) We appreciate the able assistance rendered by Mr. 

Sidharth Luthra, learned ASG, who is appointed as amicus 

curiae to represent the cause of the victim in the present case. 



29) With the above directions, we dispose of the suo motu 



MARCH 28, 2014.




                (P. SATHASIVAM)                                  







               (SHARAD ARVIND BOBDE)                                   



               (N.V. RAMANA)                                   



"Loved reading this piece by Vineet Kumar?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"

Published in Criminal Law
Views : 3830


Latest Judgments

More »