(1.) The Appellant who is minor approached this Court by filing writ petition seeking relief for termination of pregnancy under the provision of Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act,1971') on the ground that she has been subjected to sexual harassment by the accused due to which she become pregnant. The learned Single Judge after hearing the writ petitioner, directed the Respondents/State to obtain the status period of the age of pregnancy carrying by the Petitioner, on which it was found that the pregnancy was of more than 20 weeks and the termination may cause threat to life of the Petitioner. On the basis of the said report submitted by the Respondents/State, the writ petition filed by the Petitioner was dismissed, stating that as per the provision of sub-Section 2 of Section 3 of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 the termination of the pregnancy cannot be ordered.
(2.) Aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single Judge, the Appellant approached this Court by way of filing the appeal. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the Appellant submits that looking to the age of pregnancy, now Appellant is not pressing for the first relief sought by her in the writ petition, but the learned Single Judge has not considered the second relief sought by her with respect to the grant of compensation to the victim.
(3.) The learned counsel for the State submits that the grant of compensation has been taken care of under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, 'the POCSO Act') and the relevant provision is provided under Section 33(8) of the said Act. He further submits that Rule 7 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Rules, 2012 (for short, 'the POCSO Rules') also provides the relief to the victim with respect to the grant of monetary compensation against the illegal sexual harassment committed by any person to her. Section 33(1) and Section 33(8) of the POCSO Act are reproduced herein below :