Rape Conviction and Victim Compensation: Supreme Court’s Verdict in Tekan Alias Tekram vs. State of Chhattisgarh

The case of Tekan Alias Tekram vs. State of Chhattisgarh is a significant judgment dealing with the conviction of the accused under Section 376 IPC and the question of victim compensation. The Supreme Court upheld the lower courts’ decision convicting the accused and emphasized the need for uniform victim compensation schemes across states, especially for victims with physical disabilities.

Background of the Case

The case pertains to an incident where the prosecutrix, a blind and illiterate girl, was subjected to repeated sexual assault on the false promise of marriage. She lived with her father and three brothers after her mother had left. The accused, Tikendra, was a friend of her brother and frequently visited their house.

The prosecution alleged that the accused took advantage of the prosecutrix’s vulnerability and repeatedly committed sexual intercourse with her on the pretext of marrying her. When she became pregnant, the accused refused to marry her and stopped visiting her. The matter was brought before the Panchayat, where the accused admitted to the relationship but refused marriage. Subsequently, the father of the prosecutrix filed a police complaint.

Trial Court Proceedings

The accused was charged under Section 376 IPC. The trial court considered the following key pieces of evidence:

• The prosecutrix’s testimony, where she recognized the accused by his voice and touch.
• Medical reports confirming her pregnancy.
• Statements from Panchayat members who testified about the accused’s admission.

Based on this evidence, the trial court found the accused guilty and sentenced him to 7 years of rigorous imprisonment.

High Court Appeal

The accused appealed against the trial court’s verdict in the High Court of Chhattisgarh, arguing:

• The relationship was consensual.
• There was no force or coercion.
• The prosecutrix delayed filing the complaint.

The High Court dismissed these arguments and upheld the trial court’s ruling, affirming the conviction and sentence.

Supreme Court Appeal

The accused then approached the Supreme Court, challenging both the conviction and the sentence.

Supreme Court’s Analysis

The Supreme Court reviewed the evidence and found:

• The prosecutrix was blind and illiterate, placing her in an extremely vulnerable position.
• The accused’s promise of marriage was a clear case of deception intended to exploit the victim.
• The medical and Panchayat evidence corroborated the prosecutrix’s version.

The Court ruled:

• The prosecution had proved the case beyond a reasonable doubt.
• The conviction under Section 376 IPC was legally sound.
• The accused’s arguments of consent were untenable given the victim’s circumstances.

Victim Compensation and Uniformity Across States

While upholding the conviction, the Supreme Court raised an important question: What compensation should be awarded to the victim?

The Court noted that different states provided widely varying compensation amounts, ranging from Rs. 20,000 to Rs. 10 lakh. The Court highlighted the State of Goa’s scheme, which offers up to Rs. 10 lakh for rape victims, and urged other states to formulate a uniform compensation policy under Section 357A CrPC.

Victim’s Financial Status and Compensation

Upon investigating the victim’s circumstances, the Court found:

• She was living alone in a kuccha house in Nandini Kundini, District Durg.
• She had no financial support apart from a Rs. 300 disability pension.
• Her two brothers lived separately and were daily wage laborers.

In contrast, the accused:

• Lived in the same village in a pucca house.
• Had inherited 2 acres of land.
• Had a family and was relatively better off.

The Court emphasized that no amount of money could restore the victim’s dignity but financial assistance was essential for her rehabilitation.

Final Judgment and Compensation Award

The Supreme Court issued the following orders:

• The conviction and 7-year sentence of the accused was upheld.
• The State of Chhattisgarh was directed to pay the victim Rs. 8,000 per month as compensation for her lifetime.
• The Court clarified that this amount was equivalent to interest on a Rs. 10 lakh fixed deposit and should not be paid as a lump sum.
• All states and union territories were urged to adopt a uniform compensation scheme for rape victims, particularly those with disabilities.

Conclusion

The judgment in Tekan Alias Tekram vs. State of Chhattisgarh is significant not only for upholding the conviction but also for establishing a precedent on victim compensation. The Supreme Court’s emphasis on uniform compensation highlights the need for a structured and fair approach to rehabilitating survivors of sexual violence.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Tekan Alias Tekram vs State of Chhattisgar Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 11-02-2016-1741852587883.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Rape Cases
See all petitions in SC/ST Act Case
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Judgment by M.Y. Eqbal
See all petitions in Judgment by Arun Mishra
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments February 2016
See all petitions in 2016 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category