Facts
The petitioner’s son, Dushyant Chouhan, was murdered on July 1, 2022, following an assault by a knife
Source reference: p. 2An FIR (No. 272/2022) was registered under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code
Source reference: p. 3Under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and accompanying state guidelines, victims' families are entitled to compensation of ₹8,25,000/- upon the completion of 50% of the investigation in death cases
Source reference: p. 3Despite submitting multiple representations to the Collector (Respondent No. 2) and receiving assistance from the State Legal Aid Committee (Respondent No. 3), no compensation was disbursed
Source reference: p. 3The petitioner filed this writ petition seeking a direction for the respondents to decide his representation and grant the stipulated compensation
Source reference: p. 2Issues
1. Whether the respondent authorities are legally obligated to consider and decide the petitioner's representation for compensation under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) guidelines within a reasonable timeframe.
Source reference: p. 3-4Law Applied
The court's reasoning was based on the statutory guidelines and circulars issued under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, specifically Clause 45, which mandates the grant of compensation to victims or their families in cases involving death
Source reference: p. 3The court also applied the principles of administrative law regarding the duty of public authorities to act non-arbitrarily and to dispose of pending representations in a time-bound and objective manner
Source reference: p. 4Reasoning
The court noted that the petitioner did not challenge a specific order but rather sought a mandamus for the disposal of a pending representation dated January 5, 2023
Source reference: p. 3-4The respondent’s counsel raised no objection to a limited prayer for a time-bound decision on the representation
Source reference: p. 4Without delving into the merits of the petitioner's entitlement, the court found that the continued inaction by the respondent authorities necessitated a judicial direction to ensure that the administrative process is completed in accordance with the law/rules/regulations
Source reference: p. 4Holding
The Court disposed of the writ petition without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case
It directed Respondent No. 2 (Collector, Mahasamund) to consider and decide the petitioner’s representation (Annexure P/1) in an objective manner and in accordance with the applicable law/rules within 120 days from the receipt of the order
Source reference: p. 4Final order was passed on April 29, 2026
Source reference: p. 5Original Court PDF
DHARAMSINGH CHOUHANvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in