Frame rules on com­pen­sa­tion to sex­ual of­fences, acid at­tack vic­tims: Apex court

The Free Press Journal - - NATION -

The Supreme Court on Thurs­day di­rected the Na­tional Le­gal Ser­vices Author­ity (NALSA) to pre­pare model rules re­gard­ing com­pen­sa­tion to be paid to vic­tims of sex­ual of­fences and acid at­tacks across the coun­try.

"We are of the opin­ion that it would be ap­pro­pri­ate if NALSA sets up a com­mit­tee of about four-five per­sons who can pre­pare the model rules for vic­tim com­pen­sa­tion for sex­ual of­fences and acid at­tack... " a bench of Jus­tice Madan B. Lokur and Jus­tice Deepak Gupta said.

Not­ing the of­fer of So­lic­i­tor Gen­eral Ran­jit Ku­mar and am­i­cus cu­riae Indira Jais­ing to as­sist the com­mit­tee to be set up by NALSA for pre­par­ing the model rules, the court said that the "Chair­per­son or nom­i­nee of Chair­per­son of the Na­tional Com­mis­sion for Women should be as­so­ci­ated with the com­mit­tee".

The court asked NALSA to file the com­mit­tee re­port on or be­fore De­cem­ber 31.

In an­other mat­ter, the apex court said it would hear on De­cem­ber 7 mat­ters re­lated to reg­u­la­tion of pub­lic trans­port, in­clud­ing app-based taxi ser­vices af­ter am­i­cus cu­riae Indira Jais­ing said that op­er­a­tors of th­ese app­based com­pa­nies were head­quar­tered in for­eign lo­ca­tions and did not sub­mit to lo­cal ju­ris­dic­tion where their taxis were op­er­at­ing.

She told the court that Uber's op­er­a­tions were stopped in Lon­don as its op­er­a­tors did not sub­mit to the ju­ris­dic­tion of au­thor­i­ties there.

Re­fer­ring to the In­ter­net­based plat­forms, Jais­ing told the court that none of them have of­fices in In­dia. "They have of­fi­cers over­seas, like in Nor­way, and you can't reach them. They are not sub­ject­ing them­selves to lo­cal ju­ris­dic­tions."

The apex court did not ac­cept Jais­ing's plea to waive the pro­ce­dure of sub­ject­ing a 10-year-old mi­nor, who gave birth to a child fol­low­ing sex­ual as­sault in Chandi­garh, from be­ing put to cross-ex­am­i­na­tion dur­ing on­go­ing trial in the case.

She said the fact that the mi­nor gave birth and foren­sic ev­i­dence in the case should be suf­fi­cient for the trial court to de­cide the mat­ter.

How­ever, cit­ing the le­gal rights of the ac­cused, the court re­fused to en­ter­tain the plea and re­fused to in­ter­fere with the trial go­ing on a day-to-day ba­sis.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.