Case Name: S.V. v. STATE
Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi
Case No.: CRL.A. 728/2024
Date of Decision: December 10, 2024
Judges: Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Amit Sharma
By: Aakanksha Bhatia
I. Facts of the Case
The Appellant, S.V., was convicted by the Trial Court under Sections 363/376(2)(i) and (n) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 6 and 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act for the repeated penetrative sexual assault of his daughter, the survivor in this case.
II. Issues Before the Court
While the main issue before the Court was the Appellant’s criminal appeal, the Court addressed several ancillary issues related to the survivor’s well-being and the broader issue of ensuring free medical treatment for victims of sexual assault. These issues included:
- Disbursement of Compensation: The Trial Court awarded interim and final compensation to the survivor, but there were delays in disbursing these funds.
- Survivor’s Education and Medical Needs: The survivor had to discontinue her education due to the trauma of the assault and required medical treatment and
- Rehabilitation and Support: The Court explored options for the survivor’s rehabilitation, including vocational training as a Para Legal Volunteer (PLV) with the
- Access to Free Medical Treatment: The Court discovered that despite legal provisions, the survivor faced challenges in accessing free medical treatment guaranteed under Section 397 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) and Section 357C of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
III. Arguments Advanced by the Parties
The Appellant’s arguments challenging his conviction and sentence are not detailed in the provided source. However, the Court’s engagement with the DSLSA, the amicus curiae, and the survivor herself highlights the key arguments and concerns surrounding the survivor’s rights and welfare:
- DSLSA: Abhinav Pandey, representing the DSLSA, highlighted the difficulties faced by the survivor in accessing free medical treatment despite clear legal provisions. He argued for the need to sensitize hospitals and medical professionals about their obligations under the BNSS and CrPC.
- Amicus Curiae: The amicus curiae, Ms. Harpreet Kalsi, played an active role in advocating for the survivor’s needs, particularly regarding her education and medical
- Survivor: The survivor expressed her desire to complete her education and receive necessary medical treatment and counseling.
IV. Judgment of the Court
The provided source does not detail the Court’s judgment on the Appellant’s criminal appeal. However, it provides extensive detail on the Court’s orders and directions regarding the survivor’s welfare and the broader issue of access to free medical treatment for victims of sexual assault:
A. Survivor-Specific Orders
- Compensation Disbursement: The Court directed the release of the final compensation amount of Rs. 13,00,000/- to the survivor and the creation of fixed deposits as per the survivor’s and her mother’s wishes.
- Educational Support: The Court facilitated the procurement of the survivor’s 10th- grade marksheet and encouraged her enrollment in 12th grade through open
- Rehabilitation as a PLV: The Court supported the survivor’s training and potential employment as a PLV with the DSLSA.
- Access to Medical Treatment: The Court reiterated the legal provisions mandating free medical treatment for victims of sexual assault and directed compliance by all medical establishments.
B. Broader Directions on Free Medical Treatment
Recognizing the challenges faced by the survivor and other victims of sexual assault, the Court issued detailed directions to ensure compliance with the legal provisions on free medical treatment:
- Scope of Offenses: The Court’s directions explicitly listed the offenses covered, including rape, gang rape, acid attacks, and offenses under the POCSO Act.
- Obligation to Provide Treatment: All medical facilities, public and private, were mandated to provide free medical treatment, including first aid, diagnosis, inpatient admission, outpatient assistance, diagnostic tests, surgery, and counseling services.
- Prohibition on Refusal: Medical establishments were prohibited from turning away victims/survivors without providing free treatment and were directed not to insist on ID proof in emergency situations.
- Public Awareness: The Court ordered all medical facilities to display prominent notices in English and the vernacular language stating the availability of free
- Sensitization of Medical Staff: The Court directed the sensitization of medical professionals about the legal provisions and the criminal liability for non-compliance.
- Smooth Transition Between Facilities: The Court ordered the provision of ambulances and necessary certificates to ensure smooth transitions if a victim/survivor required transfer to another medical facility.
- Police Action: The Court directed the police to immediately register complaints under Section 200 of the BNSS (Section 166B of the IPC) against any medical professional or establishment refusing treatment and to refer victims/survivors to the DSLSA/DLSA for legal assistance.
- Role of DSLSA/DLSA: The Court emphasized the DSLSA/DLSA’s role in providing legal assistance, facilitating access to free treatment, and following up on FIRs related to the specified offenses.
- Circulation of Order: The Court ordered the circulation of its order to all relevant courts, law enforcement agencies, and government departments to ensure widespread awareness and compliance.
V. Conclusion
The provided source does not offer the final outcome of the Appellant’s criminal appeal. However, the case highlights the High Court of Delhi’s proactive approach in:
- Ensuring the well-being of the survivor: The Court took concrete steps to address the survivor’s educational, medical, and financial needs, showcasing a victim-centric
- Addressing Systemic Issues: Recognizing the barriers faced by victims of sexual assault in accessing free medical treatment, the Court issued comprehensive directions aimed at enforcing legal provisions and ensuring compliance by medical establishments and law enforcement agencies.
By issuing these directions and ordering their wide circulation, the Court sought to create a more robust and responsive system for protecting the rights and ensuring the timely and effective medical care of victims of sexual assault.