Mainu Gohain Mahato Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010190262023

¶3

2025:GAU-AS:2405

¶4

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/4999/2023

¶6

MAINU GOHAIN MAHATO W/O LATE CHANDAN MAHATU, VILL-POHUMARA, P.S.-NORTH LAKHIMPUR, DIST-LAKHIMPUR (ASSAM), PIN-787023

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, HOME AND POLITICAL DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GHY-06

¶9

2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM FINANCE DEPARTMENT ASSAM DISPUR GHY-6

¶10

3:THE ASSAM STATE LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY SITUATED IN THE OLD BUILDING OF GAUHATI HIGH COURT P.S.-LATASIL DIST- KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PIN-781001

¶11

4:THE CHAIRMAN DISTRICT LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST-LAKHIMPUR PIN-787001

¶12

5:THE DISTRICT LEGAL SERVICES AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY

¶13

Page No.# 2/5

¶14

NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST- LAKHIMPUR PIN-787001

¶15

6:THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE NORTH LAKHIMPUR POLICE STATION DIST-LAKHIMPUR PIN-78700

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. W RAHMAN, MR M RAHMAN

¶17

Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, SC, ASLSA,SC, FINANCE

¶18

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY

¶19

ORDER

¶20

05.03.2025

¶21

Heard Mr. W. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. R.S. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, Assam State Legal Services Authority [ASLSA] for the respondent no. 3. Also heard Mr. N. Goswami, learned Junior Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent nos. 1, 4, 5 & 6; and Mr. R. Borpujari, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Department for the respondent no. 2.

¶22

The petitioner has stated that her husband, Late Chandan Mahatu was killed in an incident which occurred inside their dwelling house on 05.09.2019. In connection with the said incident, a First Information Report [FIR] was lodged before the Officer In-Charge, Silonibari Out Post under North Lakhimpur Police Station on 06.09.2019. On receipt of the FIR, the Officer In-Charge, North Lakhimpur Police Station registered a case, North Lakhimpur Police Station Case no. 1075/2019 for the offences under Section 448 and Section 302, IPC. On completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer [I.O.] of the case submitted a charge-sheet under Section 173[2], CrPC vide Charge-Sheet no. 40 of 2020 on 31.01.2020 finding a prima-facie case for commission of the offence under Section 448 and

¶23

Page No.# 3/5

¶24

Section 302, IPC against an accused person. After submission of the Charge-Sheet, the trial of the case is presently going on before the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge [FTC], Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur in Sessions Case no. 38[NL]/2020.

¶25

The petitioner being the victim of a crime, preferred an application before the District Legal Services Authority [DLSA], North Lakhimpur seeking compensation under the Assam Victim Compensation Scheme, 2012, as amended. Stating that despite submission of the application seeking compensation, the DLSA did not consider the case of the petitioner, the writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking inter-alia a direction to the respondent authorities to pay an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- in terms of a Notification dated 01.02.2019 of the Political [A] Department, Government of Assam whereby an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- is to be provided to a victim under the Assam Victim Compensation Scheme, 2012, as amended.

¶26

An affidavit-in-opposition has been filed on behalf of the respondent no. 3, that is, the Assam State Legal Services Authority [ASLSA]. In the said affidavit-in-opposition, an Order dated 12.12.2022 passed by the respondent no. 5 in the application preferred by the petitioner, registered and numbered as Victim Compensation Case no. 15 of 2022, has been annexed. On perusal of the Order dated 12.12.2022, it is noticed that the application of the petitioner was duly considered and after recording its reasons, the respondent no. 5 found it reasonable and justified to grant an interim compensation at that stage. Taking note of the fact that the compensation payable in case of death is Rs. 5,00,000/- as per the Assam Victim Compensation Scheme, 2012, as amended, the respondent no. 5 had found it justified to make an order for payment of interim compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the legal heirs of the deceased victim, that is, the wife [the petitioner] and the minor daughter of the petitioner for their present subsistence and survival and to alleviate their sufferings. The respondent no. 5 had further observed that the final compensation shall be considered later for payment only after disposal of the main case by the learned trial court and as per the directions/recommendations, if any, of the learned trial court. The respondent no. 5 had directed to disburse the said amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- as soon as the fund is available. It has been further stated in the affidavit-in-opposition that the amount of interim compensation of

¶27

Page No.# 4/5

¶28

Rs. 1,00,000/- could not be disbursed immediately due to scarcity of fund.

¶29

Ms. Choudhury, learned Standing Counsel, ASLSA has submitted that a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- has been disbursed to the petitioner and the minor daughter of the petitioner in August, 2024. Though the petitioner in this writ petition has sought a direction to the respondent authorities to pay an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- in terms of the Assam Victim Compensation Scheme, 2012, as amended, this Court is of the considered view that on the basis of the application wherein the petitioner made the prayer for disbursement of the said amount, the jurisdictional District Legal Services Authority had found it justified, recording its reasons, to order for payment of interim compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/-.

¶30

The Assam Victim Compensation Scheme, 2012, notified vide Notification dated 18.10.2012 has provided a remedy of appeal in Clause 8 thereof. As per Clause 8, any victim aggrieved of the denial of compensation by the District Legal Services Authority, may file an appeal before the State Legal Services Authority within a period of ninety days from the date of order of denial : provided that the State Legal Services Authority, if satisfied, for the reasons to be recorded in writing, may condone the delay in filing the appeal.

¶31

As the remedy of preferring appeal is available to the petitioner if the petitioner is aggrieved by the grant of interim compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- by the Order dated 12.12.2022 by the District Legal Services Authority, the petitioner is at liberty to prefer an appeal in terms of Clause 8 of the Assam Victim Compensation Scheme, 2012, as amended, before the State Legal Services Authority.

¶32

It is observed that if the petitioner prefers an appeal within a period of 1 [one] month from today, the appellate authority shall condone the time period spent from the date of filing and the date of disposal of the present writ petition for the purpose of condoning the period of delay, if any, in terms of the proviso to Clause 8 of the Assam Victim Compensation Scheme, 2012, as amended., and also by taking into consideration any other period of delay considering the peculiar status of the petitioner, and shall proceed to consider the appeal on merits.

¶33

Page No.# 5/5

¶34

With the observations made above, the writ petition is disposed of. No cost.

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

Comparing Assistant

Mainu Gohain Mahato v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mainu Gohain Mahato v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jyotirindra Roychowdhury Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

International Engineering Construction and Anr. Vs the Union of India and 3 Ors.

Gobinda Chandra Kalita Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department and Anr. Vs Rushan Ahmed Barbhuiya and 22 Ors.

Mazaharul Sultan Vs the State of Assam and Ors.

Prafulla Nath and 23 Ors. Vs the Union of India and 7 Ors.