Minor Gang Rape Case in Lucknow: When Chargesheet Is Filed but Compensation Is Denied

Minor Gang Rape Case in Lucknow: When Chargesheet Is Filed but Compensation Is Denied

NHRC Case Analysis

(Diary No. 8005/IN/2024 | Case No. 17311/24/48/2024)

By Lenin Raghuvanshi

(Human Rights Defender)

The purpose of victim compensation laws is to ensure that survivors of sexual violence receive timely financial relief and rehabilitation, independent of the outcome of trial. However, an NHRC-monitored case from Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, reveals a troubling gap between legal entitlement and administrative practice, raising serious concerns about access to justice for minor survivors.

This blog analyses NHRC Case No. 17311/24/48/2024, which was closed by the Commission on 19 December 2024, despite denial of compensation by district authorities.

Case Identification

• NHRC Diary No.: 8005/IN/2024

• NHRC Case/File No.: 17311/24/48/2024

• Victim: Minor girl (identity protected)

• Incident: Gang rape

• Registration Date (NHRC): 30 August 2024

• Complainant: Lenin Raghuvanshi

• Location: Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh

Allegations and Criminal Proceedings

The complaint, based on a newspaper report, alleged that:

• A minor girl was gang-raped by four accused persons

• The family initially approached the police, but no prompt action was taken

Following NHRC’s intervention:

• FIR No. 195/2024 was registered at PS Thakurganj, Lucknow

• Sections invoked:

  • IPC: 376D, 323, 328, 342, 504, 506, 120B

  • POCSO Act: Sections 5G / 6

Status of Accused

• Five accused were named

• All accused were arrested

• Chargesheet filed against four accused in regular court

• One accused was a minor; a separate chargesheet was filed before the Juvenile Justice Board, Lucknow

At this stage, the criminal justice process had formally moved forward.

NHRC’s Key Direction on Compensation

Vide proceedings dated 07 November 2024, the NHRC made an important finding:

• Since a chargesheet under Section 376D IPC had been filed,

• The victim was entitled to ₹7,00,000 under
  Rule 5 (Section 376D IPC) of the
  Uttar Pradesh Rani Lakshmi Bai Mahila Evam Bal Samman Kosh Rules, 2015

The Commission noted that:

• The first installment must be paid within 15 days of FIR registration

• The remaining amount must be released within one month of filing the chargesheet (chargesheet filed in July 2024)

Accordingly, NHRC directed the District Magistrate, Lucknow, to:

• Release the compensation

• Submit a compliance report within four weeks

Rejection of Compensation by District Authorities

In response, the Office of the District Magistrate, Lucknow, submitted:

• A report dated 12 December 2024

• An order of the District Steering Committee, which rejected the proposal for monetary relief

The rejection was made despite:

• Filing of chargesheet

• Explicit NHRC observation on statutory entitlement

• Clear timelines prescribed under the Rules

Closure of the Case by NHRC

On 19 December 2024, the NHRC closed the case with the observation that:

• The criminal case is sub judice

• Since chargesheet has been filed, further intervention by the Commission is not warranted

Accordingly, the case was marked:

“Concluded and No Further Action Required”

Critical Analysis

1. Compensation Is Not Dependent on Conviction

Under the Rani Lakshmi Bai Mahila Evam Bal Samman Kosh Rules, 2015, compensation:

• Is a statutory relief

• Is triggered by registration of FIR and filing of chargesheet

• Is not dependent on trial outcome

Rejection by the District Steering Committee appears inconsistent with the Rules themselves.

2. Conflict Between NHRC Finding and Executive Action

The NHRC:

• Acknowledged entitlement

• Issued a clear direction to release compensation

Yet, the district authority:

• Rejected the proposal

• Faced no further scrutiny after case closure

This creates a serious accountability vacuum.

3. Impact on the Minor Survivor

For a minor survivor of gang rape:

• Compensation is crucial for medical care, counseling, education, and rehabilitation

• Delay or denial deepens secondary victimization

• Closure without relief sends a discouraging message to survivors

Human Rights Perspective

Article 21 – Right to Life and Dignity

For survivors of sexual violence, Article 21 includes:

• Right to rehabilitation

• Right to state support

• Right to live with dignity after trauma

Obligations Under POCSO Framework

The POCSO regime emphasizes:

• Child-centric justice

• Immediate support and compensation

• Avoidance of re-traumatization

Administrative denial of relief defeats the spirit of child protection laws.

This case highlights a critical reality:

• Filing of chargesheet does not automatically translate into victim relief

• Statutory compensation schemes can be rendered ineffective by administrative discretion

• Closure of cases without resolving compensation disputes risks normalizing injustice

Justice for survivors is not only about arrest and trial—it is also about timely support and rehabilitation.

Final Reflection

When a minor survivor is legally entitled to compensation, denial is not a procedural lapse—it is a moral failure.

If compensation schemes fail at the district level, the promise of survivor-centric justice remains unfulfilled.