New Delhi [India], April 21 : The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to entertain a plea seeking transfer of the deceased victims' family from Uttar Pradesh to Delhi on the grounds of safety and rehabilitation (contingency plan) in the 2020 gang rape and murder of a 10-year-old Dalit girl in Hathras, Uttar Pradesh.
Noting that the matter continues to be actively monitored by the Allahabad High Court, a bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe requested the High Court to take up the plea seeking a contingency plan for the victims' families.
"We are of the opinion that it would not be proper for this Court to consider the order dated for two reasons: Firstly, the present SLP is limited to the interim order dated 27.06.2022, and much time has passed since its issuance. Secondly, the subsequent order is presently under review before the High Court. We request the High Court to take up the challenge to the said order and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law", the Court noted.
The Supreme Court was hearing a petition filed by the victim's family through Advocate Mahmood Pracha. Pracha argued that the case involves compliance with the SC/ST Act, particularly Rule 15, which mandates a contingency plan for victim protection. He also raised a grievance over the High Court's refusal to transfer the family to Delhi on the basis of jurisdictional difficulties.
During the hearing, the bench questioned the maintainability of the plea in light of the pending proceedings before the High Court. "Why is this continuing when it is pending before the High Court?" the Court asked, querying how the petitioner could pursue parallel remedies in two jurisdictions.
Pracha responded that the High Court had rejected certain reliefs, including relocation of the family outside Uttar Pradesh and therefore the petitioner had approached the Supreme Court. He pointed the bench to portions of the High Court record to emphasise that the plea for transfer to Delhi had not been entertained.
The counsel appearing for Uttar Pradesh submitted that subsequent orders had been passed by the State government offering relocation of the family within Uttar Pradesh, such as to Aligarh or Kasganj and maintained that the issue remains "very much alive" before the High Court. It was also submitted that the High Court had expressed dissatisfaction with the State's stand.
Taking note of the ongoing proceedings, the bench observed that it would not be appropriate to examine the issues at this stage. The Court ultimately disposed of the special leave petition, requesting the High Court to expeditiously decide the pending application in accordance with the law.
The Allahabad High Court has been closely monitoring the Hathras case, particularly on issues relating to the victim's family's safety, rehabilitation and administrative accountability. It has, in recent proceedings, directed the State to expedite relocation measures, flagged lapses by local authorities and continues to seek status updates on the investigation