SIMHADRI BHARATHI Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel Sri K.Venkat Reddy for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Home for respondents 1 and 2, and learned standing counsel Sri J.Anil Kumar representing State Legal Services Authority for respondent no.3.

(2.) In all these Writ Petitions, accused who caused motor vehicle accidents as well as vehicles involved in the accidents, resulting in death of family members of claimants, were not traced. While registering the crimes as well as filing charge sheets, the Police have clearly indicated that the accused are undetected. Claiming that since accused were not detected and insurance companies are not identified, the family members of the victims cannot file cases under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, Act, 1988) to claim compensation for the loss caused, these writ petitions are instituted praying to grant compensation under Sec. 357-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C') and 'the Telangana Victim Compensation Scheme' (Scheme) formulated and notified by the State Government vide G.O.Ms.No.9 Law (LA, LA&J-HomeCourts.B) Department, dtd. 7/3/2015. They are aggrieved by rejection of their claim by the Legal Services Authority.

(3.) In pursuant to the introduction of Sec. 357-A of Cr.P.C., as amended in the year 2008, every State Government is required to prepare a Scheme for providing funds to pay compensation to the victims of crime or their dependents/family members, who have suffered loss and injury as a result of crime leading to death or grave injury and who require rehabilitation. In coordination with the Central Government, 2015 Scheme is formulated by the State Government.