http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 11  

PETITIONER: SHRI BODHISATTWA GAUTAM

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: MISS SUBHRA CHAKRABORTY

DATE OF JUDGMENT15/12/1995

BENCH: AHMAD SAGHIR S. (J) BENCH: AHMAD SAGHIR S. (J) KULDIP SINGH (J)

CITATION:  1996 AIR  922            1996 SCC  (1) 490  JT 1995 (9)   509        1995 SCALE  (7)228

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                       J U D G M E N T S. SAGHIR AHMAD. J.      Subhra Chakraborty  (alias - Kalpana) who was a student of the  Baptist College,  Kohima where  the opposite  party, Shri Bodhisattwa Gautam was a lecturer, filed a complaint in the Court  of the  Judicial Magistrate,  Ist Class,  Kohima, Nagaland, alleging, inter alia, as under :-      "3.  That,  your   complainant  begs  to      state that  in April  1989  the  accused      person  entered  into  Baptist  College,      Kohima as  a Lecturer  thereof  and  the      complainant was  a student  of the  said      College at that relevant period.      4.   That, the  accused  person  was  in      said Service  in Kohima  from April 1989      till he  resigned the  Service  on  27th      Jan, 1995  and was  residing in a rented      house in Kenezou Valley, Kohima owned by      Dr. Zakiebatsu Angam.      5.   That, on  6th Feb. 1995 the accused      person left  for silchar  and  presently      residing  in  his  uncle’s  (Shri  Amiya      Kanta Chakraborty)  house  in  Premtala,      Silchar-4, Dist. Cachar, in the State of      Assam  and   assumed  his   service   as      Lecturer  in  Cachar  College  (Commerce      Dept.) Silchar - 4 (Assam).      6.   That, on  the 10th  June, 1989  for      the 1st  time the  accused  visited  the      complainant’s residence  in  Kohima  and      thereafter  often   he  used   to  visit      complainant’s residence, as a teacher he      was respected by the complainant as well      as  all   the  members   including   her      parents. In  course of  such visits once

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 11  

    in the  month of  Nov. 1989  the accused      voluntarily told  your complainant  that      he was  already in  her love. Thus there      developed   a    love   affair   between      themselves since 1989.      7.   That, the  complainant most  humbly      states  further   that   with   malafide      intention to  practise deception  on the      complainant,  the   accused  gave  false      assurance of  marriage to  the  innocent      complainant  and   thereby  the  accused      dishonestly procured  sexual intercourse      with the  complainant. The accused often      use to  induce the  complainant to  have      biological   contact   with   him,   but      whenever  he   was  approached   by  the      complainant  to  complete  the  marriage      ceremony,  the  accused  very  tactfully      used to  defer  the  marriage  sometimes      saying  that  he  was  waiting  for  his      parents  formal  consent  and  sometimes      saying to  cooperate him  till he  got a      Govt. Service.      8.   That, in  course of continuation of      the affairs  between the complainant and      the   accused,   the   complainant   got      pregnant twice,  once in  the  month  of      September, 1993  and secondly  on in the      month of  April  1994  out  of  her  co-      habitation with the accused person.      9.   That, the complainant being worried      about   her   said   pregnancy   created      pressure upon  the accused  to marry her      immediately and  to save  her from being      ruined, but  the accused  on the plea of      his parents permission went on deferring      the marriage,  as a  result there  was a      quarrel in  between the  complainant and      the accused,  where  after  the  accused      lastly opined  for  secret  marriage  to      avoid social gathering as he was waiting      for   his    parents   permission.   The      complainant being pregnant was placed in      a very awkward position, as such, agreed      to said secret marriage, accordingly the      accused on  the  20th  September,  1993,      married the  complainant in front of the      God he  Worships  in  his  residence  in      Kenozou  Valley,   Kohima   by   putting      Vermilion (sindur)  on the complainant’s      forehead and accepted the complainant as      his lawful wife and thus the complainant      was  consorted  and  consoled.  But  the      complainant   faced   further   corporal      punishment,  as   the  accused  kept  on      insisting   the    complainant   to   be      refrained from  giving birth to the baby      and  was  pressurizing  her  to  undergo      operation/abortion despite  her  refusal      for   the   same.   The   accused   with      fraudulent  intention   to  deceive  the      complainant proposed  the said  abortion      on the plea that birth of the baby would      be a  barrier to convince his parents to      accept   the    complainant   as   their

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 11  

    daughter-in-law  and  such  event  would      lead  the   complainant  to  a  path  of      unhappiness. The  complainant  being  an      innocent lady  failed to  understand the      accused’s wicked  and  mischievous  plan      whereby  the   accused   succeeded   and      dishonestly motivated the complainant to      undergo operation in the Putonou Clinic,      Kohima and aborted in October’ 93.      10.  That, the  said Ceremony  of giving      Sindur (Vermilion)  on the complainant’s      forehead by  the accused in front of the      God made the complainant to believe that      she was  lawfully married  wife  of  the      accused and  with such  believe  she  in      good faith  completely submitted herself      to the  accused as  an  ideal  wife  and      never  disbelieved   the  accused.   The      complainant even  did not have any doubt      as to  why the  accused insisted  her to      keep   their    marriage   secret.   The      complainant  was   forced   to   undergo      abortion even  second time  in the month      of April’  94 in  the  CAREWELL  NURSING      HOME at Dimapur with the pretext that if      the complainant  gave birth to any child      before the  accused could  convince  his      parents she  would never  be accepted by      Bodhisatta’s   parents   and   relatives      further their  marriage being  a  secret      one,  the   developed   stage   of   the      complainant would  hamper the dignity of      her  own   parents  and  other  paternal      relations irreparably  and  thus  taking      the privilege  of complainant  innocency      the   accused    has    exploited    the      complainant in  a very  pre-planned way.      The accused  is so  wicked that  he even      furnished  a  false  name  in  the  said      Nursing  Home  and  signed  the  consent      Register/Paper    as    BIKASH    GAUTAM      concealing  his   real  name  BODHISATTA      GAUTAM which  fact was  unknown  to  the      innocent complainant  until recently and      came to  know only  in the  2nd week  of      February, 1995 when the complainant went      to  obtain   a  certified  copy  of  the      abortion consent paper of the accused.      A copy  of said  consent paper signed by      the accused in annexed hereto and marked      as Annexure-1.      11.  That, believing  her self to be the      lawful  wife   of   the   accused,   the      complainant like  a dumb  shouldered  up      all  those   hardship  since   1989.  On      hearing the  massage  that  the  accused      would go  to Silchar, the complainant on      4th Feb.’95  went down  to  Dimapur  and      visited  the   accused   to   take   the      complainant permanently with the accused      to Silchar as he was going to Silchar to      join  as  a  Lecturer  in  a  Government      College named  CACHAR COLLEGE which both      of them  actually waited  for.  But  the      wicked    accused     forgetting     the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 11  

    consequences  of   his  all   fraudulent      activities in  total disregards of their      marriage and  their relationship refused      to accept  the complainant  as his  wife      and abandoned the complainant asking her      to forget  all her  dream. Be it further      submitted  that  the  accused’s  friends      namely (1)  Shri Subrata Datta, (2) Shri      Ranadhir Deb  (3) Shri  Prasanta Dey and      (4) Shri Pradeep Paul of Dimapur tried a      lot to  convince the  accused and not to      abandon the  complainant in such a cruel      manner, as  he had  already married  the      complainant    and    cohabited    years      together,  but   all  efforts  ended  in      futility as  the accused  in reply  said      that  the   giving   of   vermilion   on      complainant’s forehead  was  pretext  of      marriage   to   over   come   the   past      situations and  not at  all  a  complete      marriage and the accused repeatedly said      that he  had no  option, but  to abandon      the complainant  as his  parents are not      agreeable to  accept the  complainant as      their daughter-in-law.      12.  That, the  accused not only induced      the complainant  and cohabited with her,      giving her a false assurance of marriage      but  also   fraudulently  gave   through      certain marriage ceremony with knowledge      that  was   not  a  valid  marriage  and      thereby dishonestly  made the  complaint      to  believe  that  she  was  a  lawfully      married wife of the accused. The accused      even   committed    the    offence    of      miscarriage    by     compelling     the      complainant to  undergo  abortion  twice      against  her  free  will.  The  way  the      accused exploited  the  complainant  and      abandoned her  is nothing  but an act of      grave cruelty  as the  same  has  caused      serious  injury   and  danger   to   the      complainant’s health  both mentally  and      physically, as  such, the  accused above      named has  committed  Criminal  offences      punishable U/S  312/420/493/496/498-A of      Indian Penal Code."      This complaint was registered as Criminal Case No. 1/95 under Sections  312/420/493/496/498-A, Indian Penal Code and Bodhisattwa Gautam  was summoned  but he,  in the  meantime, filed a petition in the Gauhati High Court under Section 482 of the  Code of  Criminal  Procedure  for  quashing  of  the complaint and the proceedings initiated on its basis, on the ground that  the allegations,  taken at their face-value, do not make out any case against him. But the High Court by its judgment and order dated May 12, 1995.dismissed the petition compelling Bodhisattwa  Gautam to approach this Court by way of Special Leave Petition. Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 2675/95  was filed  and was dismissed by us by our order dated October 20, 1995, in which we stated as under :-           "We see no ground to interfere with      the impugned judgment of the High Court.      We dismiss  the special  leave petition.      Having done so, we further take suo motu      notice to  the facts  of  this  case  as

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 11  

    narrated in  the complainant  which  has      been read  before us. We issue notice to      the petitioner  as to  why he should not      be asked  to pay  reasonable maintenance      per month  to the  respondent during the      pendency of  the prosecution proceedings      against  him.   Mr.   A.   Bhattacharjee      accepts notice.      List it on 1.12.1995.           Petitioner in  person be present in      Court  on  the  next  date  of  hearing.      Notice be  also sent  to the  respondent      along with the copy of this order."      Pursuant to  the above  order, Shri  Bodhisattwa Gautam put in  appearance and  filed an affidavit in reply in which he denied  the allegation  made against him in the complaint and stated  that the  complaint was filed only to harass and humiliate him  and, therefore,  there  was  no  occasion  to direct  him   to  pay  any  amount  as  maintenance  to  the respondent. He  also indicated that although he had taken up service in  another College,  namely,  Cachar  College,  his services had  since been terminated. Para 4 of his affidavit in which these facts have been stated is reproduced below :-      "4.  That I  say that  I am  not in  any      employment now  and I  am an  unemployed      person after  my services  as a Lecturer      in Cachar  College,  Silchar,  has  been      terminated with effect from 16.7.1995 by      a resolution  of the  Governing Body  of      the said  College passed  in  a  meeting      held on  14.9.1995. A  true copy  of the      proceedings of  the said  meeting of the      Governing  Body   of   Cachar   College,      Silchar held  on  14.9.1995  is  annexed      hereto as Annexure - A1.      The relevant  resolution No. 5(A) of the      said meeting of the Governing Body reads      as follows :-      "Resolution No. 5(A):      The Principal placed the leave petitions      of Shri  B.Gautam, Lecturer,  Deptt.  of      Commerce,  adding   that   Shri   Gautam      resumed his duties in the College on the      re-opening  day  of  the  College  after      summer vacation,  i.e., on 15th of July,      1995 and  at first  he sought  leave for      twenty one  days and the for three years      at a stretch.      The Principal  also stated  that Shri B.      Gautam  was  appointed  against  a  lien      vacancy  for   one  year   vice  Dr.  A.      Mazumdar,  the   one-year  lien   having      expired on 9.9.1995.      The matter  was thoroughly discussed and      it was  unanimously resolved  that since      Shri B.  Gautam’s  term  of  appointment      against  lien  vacancy  had  expired  on      9.9.1995  and   his  service   was   not      confirmed, (he did not complete even one      full  year’s   service),  he  cannot  be      granted three  years’ leave at a stretch      as prayed for by him.      Also resolved that as Shri B. Gautam has      been absent  from the  College from 16th      of July,  1995 and  also the term of his

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 11  

    appointment expired  on  9.9.1995,  Shri      Gautam’s  service  as  lecturer  in  the      Deptt. of  Commerce in  Cachar  College,      Silchar  be   treated  as   having  been      terminated w.e.f. 16th July, 1995.      The Principal  be requested  to  forward      the  above   resolution  to  the  D.P.I.      Assam, for  his  kind  approval  of  the      termination of  the services  of Sri  B.      Gautam w.e.f. 16.7.1995."      This   resolution   along   with   other      resolutions passed  in the  said meeting      held on 14.9.1995 were placed before the      meeting  of   the  Governing  Body  held      subsequently    on     11.11.1995    for      confirmation. A  true copy of the notice      of meeting  to  be  held  on  11.11.1995      containing the  agenda of the meeting is      annexed hereto as Annexure - A2.      Now I  have been  reliably informed that      in the  meeting of the Governing Body on      11.11.1995,  the   aforesaid  resolution      terminating   my    service   has   been      confirmed. I  further state  that I have      not  received  any  payment  towards  my      salary since  July, 1995  and after  the      termination of  my service  with  effect      from  16.7.1995   no  question   of   my      receiving any salary arises.      In  the   circumstances  I  respectfully      submit that  no question of burdening me      with the liability of paying maintenance      to the respondent can arise."      The facts  set out  in  the  complaint  lodged  against Bodhisattwa Gautam  indicate  that  there  was  initially  a period of  romance during  which Bodhisattwa  Gautam used to visit the  house of  Subhra Chakraborty and on one occasion, he told  her that  he was  in love  with her  and ultimately succeeded, on  the basis  of his assurances to marry her, in developing sexual  relationship with  her  with  the  tragic result that  Subhra Chakraborty  became pregnant.  While  in that state,  she persuaded  Gautam to  marry  her,  but  he, deferred the  proposal on  the plea  that he had to take his parents’  permission.  He,  however,  agreed  to  marry  her secretly. Consequently, on 20th September, 1993, Bodhisattwa Gautam  took  her  before  the  God  he  worshiped  and  put Vermilion on  her forehead  and accepted  her as  his lawful wife. In  spite of  the secret  marriage,  he,  through  his insistence, succeeded  in motivating  her  for  an  abortion which took  place in  a clinic  at Kohima  in October, 1993. Subhra Chakraborty  became pregnant  second time  and at the instance of  Bodhisattwa Gautam  she had  to abort  again in April, 1994  in the  Carewell Nursing  Home at Dimapur where Gautam signed  the consent  paper and deliberately mentioned himself as Bikash Gautam.      The Gauhati  High Court,  as already pointed out above, refused to  quash the  proceeding in  Criminal Case  No 1/95 pending in  the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Kohima and this Court has upheld the judgment of the Gauhati High Court. The question is whether any further order can be passed in  the case  and Gautam  can  be  compelled  to  pay maintenance to Subhra Chakraborty during the pendency of the Criminal Case for which Show Cause Notice has been issued to him?      This Court,  as the highest Court of the country, has a

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 11  

variety  of   jurisdiction.  Under   Article   32   of   the Constitution,  it   has  the  jurisdiction  to  enforce  the Fundamental Rights guaranteed by the Constitution by issuing writs in the nature of Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Quo-Warranto  and  Certiorari.  Fundamental  Rights  can  be enforced even  against private  bodies and individuals. Even the right  to approach the Supreme Court for the enforcement of the  Fundamental Rights  under Article  32  itself  is  a Fundamental Right.  The jurisdiction  enjoyed by  this Court under  Article   32  is  very  wide  as  this  Court,  while considering a  petition for  the enforcement  of any  of the Fundamental  Rights   guaranteed  in   Part   III   of   the Constitution, can declare an Act to be ultra vires or beyond the competence  of the legislature and has also the power to award compensation  for the  violation  of  the  Fundamental Rights. See  : Rudul  Sah vs.  State of  Bihar : AIR 1983 SC 1086; Peoples’  Union for  Democratic  Rights  (through  its Secretary & Anr.) vs. Police Commissioner, Delhi Police HQs. & Anr. : (1989) 4 SCC 730.      For the  exercise  of  this  jurisdiction,  it  is  not necessary that  the person who is the victim of violation of his fundamental  right should  personally approach the Court as the  Court can  itself take  cognizance of the matter and proceed suo  motu or  on a  petition of  any public spirited individual. This  Court through  its various  decisions, has already given new dimensions, meaning and purpose to many of the fundamental  rights especially  the Right to Freedom and Liberty and  Right to  Life. The Directive Principles of the State Policy, have also been raised by this Court from their static and  unenforceable concept to a level as high as that of the fundamental rights.      This Court has, innumerable times, declared that "Right to Life"  does not  merely mean  animal existence  but means something  more,  namely,  the  right  to  live  with  human dignity.   (See   :   Francis   Coralie   Mullin   vs.   The Administrator, Union  Territory of Delhi & Ors., AIR 1981 SC 746; State  of Maharashtra vs. Chandrabhan, AIR 1983 SC 803; Olga Tellis  & Ors. vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation & Ors., AIR 1986  SC 180; and Delhi Transport Corporation vs. D.T.C. Mazdoor Congress  & Ors.,  AIR 1991  SC 101).  Right to Life would, therefore, include all those aspects of life which go to make a life meaningful, complete and worth-living.      Unfortunately, a  woman, in  our country,  belongs to a class or  group  of  society  who  are  in  a  disadvantaged position  on   account  of   several  social   barriers  and impediments and  have, therefore, been the victim of tyranny at the  hands of  men with whom they, fortunately, under the Constitution enjoy  equal status.  Women also have the right to life  and  liberty;  they  also  have  the  right  to  be respected and  treated as  equal citizens.  Their honour and dignity cannot  be touched  or violated.  They also have the right to  lead an  honourable and  peaceful life.  Women, in them, have  many personalities  combined. They  are  Mother, Daughter, Sister  and Wife  and not  play things  for centre spreads in  various magazines, periodicals or newspapers nor can they  be exploited  for obscene purposes. They must have the liberty,  the freedom  and, of  course, independence  to live the  roles assigned  to them  by  Nature  so  that  the society may  flourish as  they alone  have the  talents  and capacity to  shape the destiny and character of men anywhere and in every part of the world.      Rape is  thus not  only a crime against the person of a woman (victim), it is a crime against the entire society. It destroys the  entire psychology  of a  woman and  pushed her into deep  emotional crises.  It is  only by  her sheer will

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 8 of 11  

power that  she rehabilitates  herself in the society which, on coming  to know  of the  rape, looks  down  upon  her  in derision and  contempt. Rape  is, therefore,  the most hated crime. It  is a crime against basic human rights and is also violative of  the victim’s most cherished of the Fundamental Rights, namely,  the Right  to Life contained in Article 21. To many  feminists and  psychiatrists, rape is less a sexual offence than  an act  of aggression  aimed at  degrating and humiliating women. The rape laws do not, unfortunately, take care of  the social  aspect of  the matter  and are inept in many respects.      It is said that present days’ law relating to rape have their origin in 1736 in Britain, when Sir Mathew Hale in his Historia Placitorum  Cornea or,  in other words, "History of the pleas  of the Crown" presented common-law rape doctrines which  were   immediately  noticed  to  be  hostile  to  the interests of  women as  one of the requirement was to inform the jury  during trial  that rape charges were easy to bring but difficult  to defend.  Consequently, in  a tide  of  law reforms,  this   requirement  was   removed.  The   rule  of corroboration which  was much  stricter in  a trial  for the offence of  rape than  for other  offences was  also largely removed from law.      In  India  also  the  rule  of  "Corroboration  of  the Prosecutrix"  has   undergone  a  change  through  statutory amendments as also through decisions of this Court.      In  State  of  Himachal  Pradesh  vs.  Raghubir  Singh, 1993(2) SCC 622, this Court observed as under :-      "There is  no legal  compulsion to  look      for corroboration of the evidence of the      prosecutrix before recording an order of      conviction. Evidence  has to  be weighed      and  not   counted.  Conviction  can  be      recorded on  the sole  testimony of  the      prosecutrix, if  her  evidence  inspires      confidence  and   there  is  absence  of      circumstances   which    militate    her      veracity.  In   the  present   case  the      evidence of  the prosecutrix is found to      be   reliable    and   trustworthy.   No      corroboration was  required to be looked      for, though  enough was available on the      record. The  medical  evidence  provided      sufficient corroboration."      In State  of Karnataka  vs. Mahabaleshwar  Gourya Naik, AIR 1992  SC 2043  = 1992 Suppl. (3) SCC 179, the Court went to the extent of laying down that even if the victim of rape is not  available to  give evidence on account of her having committed suicide,  the prosecution  case cannot  be  thrown away over board. In such a case, the non-availability of the victim will  not  be  fatal  and  the  Court  can  record  a conviction on the basis of the available evidence brought on record by the prosecution.      In spite  of the decision of this Court that (depending upon the  circumstances of  the case)  corroboration of  the prosecutrix was not necessary, the cases continued to end in acquittal on  account of  mishandling of  the crime  by  the police and  the invocation of the theory of "consent" by the Courts who  tried the  offence. To overcome this difficulty, the legislature  intervened and  introduced Section 114-A in the Evidence Act by Act No. 43 of 1983 reading as under:-      114-A.    Presumption as  to absence  of      consent  in   certain  prosecutions  for      rape.- In  a prosecution  for rape under      clause (a)  or clause  (b) or clause (c)

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 9 of 11  

    or clause  (d) or  clause (e)  or clause      (g) or sub-section (2) of Section 376 of      the Indian  Penal  Code  (45  of  1860),      where sexual  intercourse by the accused      is proved and the question is whether it      was without  the consent  of  the  woman      alleged  to  have  been  raped  and  she      states in  her evidence before the Court      that she  did  not  consent,  the  Court      shall presume that she did not consent."      This Section  enables a  court to  raise a  presumption that the  woman who was the victim of rape had not consented and that  the offence  was committed  against her  will. The situation, however,  has hardly  improved. Conviction  rates for rape  are still lower than any other major crime and the woman continue  to argue  even today  that in rape cases the victimized women,  rather than  the  rapists,  were  put  on trial. A large number of women still fail to report rapes to the police  because they  fear embarrassing  and insensitive treatment by  the doctors,  the  law  enforcement  personnel and/or the  cross-examining defence  attorneys. The fear has to be  allayed from  the minds  of women so that if and when this crime  is committed, the victim may promptly report the matter to  the police  and on a chargesheet being submitted, the  trial   may  proceed   speedily  without   causing  any embarrassment to the prosecutrix who may come in the witness box without fear psychosis.      We may,  at this  stage, refer  to a  decision of  this Court in  Delhi Domestic  Working Women’s Forum vs. Union of India, 1995 (1) SCC 14, in which Court observed as under :-      "It is rather unfortunate that in recent      times, there  has been  an  increase  in      violence against  women causing  serious      concern. Rape  does indeed pose a series      of problems  for  the  criminal  justice      system. There  are  cries  for  harshest      penalties, but  often times  such crimes      eclipse the  real plight  of the victim.      Rape is  an experience  which shakes the      foundations of the lives of the victims.      For many, its effect is a long-term one,      impairing their  capacity  for  personal      relationships, altering  their behaviour      values and generating and less fears. In      addition  to  the  trauma  of  the  rape      itself,  victims   have  had  to  suffer      further agony during legal proceedings."      This Court further observed as under :-      "The defects in the present system are :      Firstly, complaints  are handled roughly      and are  not even  such attention  as is      warranted. The  victims, more often than      not, are  humiliated by  the police. The      victims  have   invariably  found   rape      trials  a   traumatic  experience.   The      experience of  giving evidence  in court      has been  negative and  destructive. The      victims often  say, they  considered the      ordeal to  be even  worse than  the rape      itself.    Undoubtedly,     the    court      proceedings added  to and  prolonged the      psychological stress  they  had  had  to      suffer as a result of the rape itself.      In this  background, it  is necessary to      indicate   the   broad   parameters   in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 10 of 11  

    assisting the victims of rape.      (1)  The complainants  of sexual assault      cases  should  be  provided  with  legal      representation. It  is important to have      some one who is well-acquainted with the      criminal justice system. The role of the      victim’s advocate  would not  only be to      explain to  the victim the nature of the      proceedings, to prepare her for the case      and to  assist her in the police station      and in  court but  to provide  her  with      guidance as to how she might obtain help      of  a   different  nature   from   other      agencies, for  example, mind counselling      or medical  assistance. It  is important      to secure  continuity of  assistance  by      ensuring that the same person who looked      after the complainant’s interests in the      police station  represent her  till  the      end of the case.      (2)  Legal assistance  will have  to  be      provided at the police station since the      victim of sexual assault might very well      be in a distressed state upon arrival at      the police  station,  the  guidance  and      support of  a lawyer  at this  stage and      whilst she was being questioned would be      of great assistance to her.      (3)  The police  should be  under a duty      to inform  the victim  of her  right  to      representation before any questions were      asked of  her and that the police report      should state  that  the  victim  was  so      informed.      (4)  A list  of advocates willing to act      in these  cases should  be kept  at  the      police station  for victims  who did not      have a  particular  lawyer  in  mind  or      whose own lawyer was unavailable.      (5)  The advocate  shall be appointed by      the  court,   upon  application  by  the      police  at   the   earliest   convenient      movement, but  in order  to ensure  that      victims were  questioned  without  undue      delay, advocates  would be authorised to      act at  the police  station before leave      of the court was sought or obtained.      (6)  In all rape trials anonymity of the      victims must  be maintained,  as far  as      necessary.      (7)  It is  necessary, having  regard to      the Directive Principles contained under      Article 38(1)  of  the  Constitution  of      India  to   set  up   Criminal  Injuries      Compensation   Board.    Rape    victims      frequently incur  substantial  financial      loss.  Some,   for  example,   are   too      dramatized to continue in employment.      (8)  Compensation for  victims shall  be      awarded by  the court  on conviction  of      the  offender   and  by   the   Criminal      Injuries Compensation  Board whether  or      not a  conviction has  taken place.  The      Board  will   take  into  account  pain,      suffering and  shock as  well as loss of

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 11  

    earnings  due   to  pregnancy   and  the      expenses  of   the  child  but  if  this      occurred as a result of the rape.           In the present situation, the third      respondent  will  have  to  evolve  such      scheme as  to wipe out the fears of such      unfortunate victims. Such a scheme shall      be prepared  within six  months from the      date of  this judgment.  Thereupon,  the      Union of  India, will  examine the  same      and shall  take necessary  steps for the      implementation  of  the  scheme  at  the      earliest."      This decision  recognises the  right of  the victim for compensation by  providing that  it shall  be awarded by the Court  on   conviction  of   the  offender  subject  to  the finalisation of  Scheme by  the Central  Government. 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. On the basis of principles set  out  in  the  aforesaid  decision  in  Delhi Domestic Working  Women’s Forum,  the  jurisdiction  to  pay interim compensation shall be treated to be part of the over all jurisdiction  of the  Courts trying the offences of rape which, as  pointed out  above is  an offence  against  basic human rights  as also  the  Fundamental  Right  of  Personal Liberty and Life.      Apart from  the above,  this  Court  has  the  inherent jurisdiction to pass any order it consists fit and proper in the interest  of justice  or to  do complete justice between the parties.      Having regard  to the  facts and  circumstances of  the present case  in which  there is  a serious  allegation that Bodhisattwa Gautam had married Subhra Chakraborty before the God he  worshiped by  putting Varmilion  on her forehead and accepting her  as his  wife and  also having impregnated her twice resulting  in abortion  on both  the occasions, we, on being prima-facie  satisfied,  dispose  of  this  matter  by providing  that  Bodhisattwa  Gautam  shall  pay  to  Subhra Chakraborty a  sum of  Rs. 1,000/-  every month  as  interim compensation during  the pendency  of Criminal Case No. 1/95 in the  court of  Judicial Magistrate,  1st  Class,  Kohima, Nagaland.  He  shall  also  be  liable  to  pay  arrears  of compensation at  the same  rate from  the date  on which the complaint was  filed till  this date. We may further observe that whatever  has been  said in this Judgment shall not, in any way,  affect or  prejudice the  Magistrate from deciding the complaint  on merits on the basis of the evidence as may be tendered before it and in accordance with law.