In this writ petition, petitioners claiming ST victimhood sought compensation following their acquittal due to doubts about the forest offence. The Court held the sexually or caste-based requirement essential for Section 3 was not met.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.2843 of 2018 (Through hybrid mode)
Jagabandhu Juanga & another …. Petitioners
Mr.C.Pattnaik, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha & another
…. Opposite Parties
Mr.P.C.Panda, Addl. Govt. Advocate
CORAM: JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
ORDER
03.11.2021
Order No.
06.
Page 1 of 1
// 2 //
(Arindam Sinha)
Judge
RKS
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether compensation under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is payable when the accused were acquitted.
Whether the requisites of an offence under section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act were satisfied in the facts of the case.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Jagabandhu Juanga
State of Odisha
Arindam Sinha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
